1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION In re: House Bill 2277 Parent and pupil Protection Act

* * * *

Stenographic report of hearing held in Philadelphia Board of Education meeting room, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Fr iday September 30, 1988 9:00 a.m.

HON. RONALD COWELL, CHAIRMAN

MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE ON LABOR RELATIONS Hon. John Davies Hon. Gerard Kosinski Hon. Dwight Evans Hon. victor Lescovitz Hon. Chaka Fattah Hon. Gordon Linton Hon. jon Fox Hon. Elinor Z. Taylor Hon. Steven Freind

Also present: Frank Christopher, Executive Director Greg White, Research Analyst Vicki Keller, Committee Staff

Reported by: Ann-Marie p. Sweeney, Reporter

ANN-MARIE P. SWEENEY ^) /r 536 ORRS BRIDGE ROAD ^{lil /rJt*l> CAMP HILL, PA 17011 ^ ^yf \

V i w /in ~J-J I / \ 2 INDEX PAGE Michael Considine, Esq., Counsel to United 5 Parents of Chester County Robert Gyurik, President, United parents of 13 Chester County Edward Sickels, Fort Washington, PA 31 Allen R. polsky, Havertown, PA 46 Cathleen Kivett, Elverson, PA 54 Marsha Sullivan, Parent, Tredyffrin-Easttown 67 School District Jennifer Sullivan 81 Norma Rolnick, Ph. D., Philadelphia, PA 94 Kathy Bond, West Chester, PA 106 Margaret Layden, Berwyn, PA 124 Diane Welsh Carlin, Havertown, PA 131 Barbara DiTullio, Delaware County National 151 Organization for Women Patricia Long, Coatesville, PA 170 Kay Trail, Downingtown, PA 190 Elizabeth Stubblebine, West Chester, PA 202 Nicholas panagoplos, member, Pennsylvania 210 State Board of Education Margaret Hurlbert, member, Pennsylvania State Board of Education James Roberts, AIDS Activities Coordinating 221 Office, Philadelphia Department of Health Dr. Louis van de Beek M.D., Philadelphia 225 Department of Health Nathalene Richardson, Pennsylvania Conference 241 of Black Basic Education Council Pat Lang, member Board of School Directors of 244 Great valley School District Karen Smith, School Nurse, West Chester 257 School District 3 INDEX (cont.'d) PAGE Cindy Sadler, Downingtown, PA 275 Joan Scalia, Downingtown, PA Dr. Thomas Losoncy, Berwyn, PA 288 Marcy Holteen, Ambler, PA 297 Meridyth Senes, Wynnewood, PA 306 Dr. Blanche Kauffman, Swarthmore, PA 314 Judith Emerson, Elementary School Counselor, 321 Palisades School District Mary Park Wederbrand, Radnor, PA 331 Sheila Tice, Scioto, PA 336 Rena Patrick, Stroudsburg, PA 339 John Fitzpatrick, Philadelphia Federation 342 of Teachers Jennifer Morales, Allentown, PA 344

INDEX TO EXHIBITS PAGE Elizabeth Treacy, Glenside 351 Gloria Kianoury, Jenkintown 353 Maria Nolan, Meadowbrook 355 Robert Gyurik 358 Marsha Sullivan 365 Kathy Bond 397 Diane Welsh Carlin 410 Patricia Long 414 Kay Trail 418 Nicholas Panagoplos 421 Marcy Holteen 425 4 CHAIRMAN COWELL: The hour of 9:00 o'clock having arrived, we will call to order this hearing which is being conducted by the House Education Committee. The subject of today's hearing is House Bill 2211, and as many people have realized already, this is the second in a series of three public hearings which the committee is conducting on this subject. Our first hearing was in Harrisburg last Friday, and our third and final hearing is scheduled for the Gateway School District in Allegheny County on Friday, October 14.

I'm Representative Ron Cowell, and I'm chairman of this committee. With me this morning is Representative John Davies, and I know that we have other members in the building and they'll be joining us very shortly. We have a very full agenda and so we will just get to the point and recognize our first witness, who is Michael Considine, who is Counsel to the United parents of Chester County. MR. CONSIDINE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I'm going to repeat several times during the day, and I'll say it for starters that we've indicated to witnesses a certain period of time that has been allotted to them. in most cases, unless it's somebody representing a statewide organization, 5 we've asked them to limit their prepared remarks to five minutes to allow at least a few minutes for members to ask questions. That's the only way we've been able to accommodate the large number of people who have asked to testify. Mr. Considine, go ahead. MR. CONSIDINE: Thank you. My name is Michael Considine. I'm an attorney with experience in constitutional law cases in both the State and Federal trial and appellate courts. I represented a parents' group at a meeting in the Downingtown School Board on October 14th of 1987, and I'll be brief to just detail some of the abuses of the school board which occurred on that evening which underline the need for this new bill.

The parents were given a little over three weeks, that is from September 20th to October 14th, to review an entire curriculum which will have a very significant effect on the lives of their children, that is the new sex education program. The leader of a group who had a petition which indicated that he represented a group of 1,900 parents was not allowed to speak at this meeting. There was a gentleman named Mr. Jones who was implementing the program for the school board. I attempted to question him in several areas, including his 6 credibility. There was some evidence that he had some kind of link with planned parenthood, which has a financial interest in the implementation of these sex education programs since they run clinics which gain financially when students are pregnant or have problems which they need to see the clinic about.

I also attempted to probe his credentials, what credentials he had to teach this program, and also he alleged that there was an endorsement by a Roman Catholic diocese of this program. However, in my attempts to probe these areas, I was cut off by the school board. They would not allow me to get into these areas, even though these were important areas to my clients who were parents whose children were going to be learning this new program.

What the parents wanted was an independent evaluation of the program, and we would even have permitted the proponents of the program to select their own independent expert so that expert testimony could be given regarding the effects of this program on the students. It was a relatively new program. It had only been implemented, I believe, in a handful of communities nationwide. Now, the board would not stay implementation of the program. They would not consider a less offensive 7 alternative. Instead, the program worked like this: parents having read the program were permitted to opt their children out of the program in writing to the school. However, the program that their children were then required to take dealt with the issues of loneliness and suicide and actually had nothing to do with sex at all. So the only alternatives parents had was either a program which many of them felt was offensive or not even go into the issue of sex at all, and they wanted a third alternative which would be a less offensive sex education alternative which parents who opted out of the program they felt was more offensive could have their children learn. However, that was not considered by the board.

Also, the fact, and I think it's a fact that medical science and experts in psychology will bear out, that the program will tend to increase sexual activity among children was not permitted to be probed at all at this hearing. And finally, the very real danger that AIDS could increase among children who were exposed to this program was not permitted to be probed, although I think there is definitely a link between increased sexual activity and increased risk of AIDS. Finally, the other problem that the parents had with the program is that parents were not emphasized as authorities to these children. In the program, the 8 parents were not to be consulted first about sexual matters, and what it tended to do was to de-emphasize the authority of the parents over their children. Now, I've also looked at this bill to comment on the constitutionality of some of its sections. You should note that the bill is based on the Hatch Act, which has been found constitutional by courts. The bill also reflects the protective role of the legislature regarding children. This has already been upheld by the United States Supreme Court in a variety of contexts, including the death penalty. There's a different standard for children than for adults. The courts are more protective of children regarding the death penalty. Also obscenity. Certain matters involving children—

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, your five minutes are up. MR. CONSIDINE: Okay. I believe there's 10 minutes on this. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Five minutes. MR. CONSIDINE: Okay. Could I just go on for another minute? CHAIRMAN COWELL: No. We'll accept questions from members now. We've been joined by Representative Jon Pox, Representative Steve Freind, and Representative Gordon 9 Linton. I'm sorry to be harsh about that, but we have only been able to accommodate all the people who have asked to testify by strictly scheduling these things and sticking to that schedule. The extra five minutes that are allotted are available for questions from members or to allow us to catch up when members ask too many questions a little bit later on in the day.

Do we have questions from members? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Considine) Q. Do you have any statistics that you put together on this, your claims about the activity after sex education and this matter of AIDS? Is that abnormal from the normal growth? A. I don't think I understand the question. Q. You made a claim that there was some kind of link of the increase of sexual activity and AIDS. Are you tying it to the educational programs in districts, and what statistics do you have to say that that's higher than the norms that have been? A. I do not have those statistics. Q. Thank you.

A. But I do believe though that where there is more sexual activity there is more of a risk for AIDS 10 incidence and that where abstinence is not stressed, as in this program, where abstinence was not even a value stressed, that what's communicated to the children is that sex before marriage is the norm. Now, sex before marriage is going to involve an increased risk of AIDS.

Q. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Sir, let me ask just a couple quick questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Considine) Q. Do you have a written statement to submit to the members? A. I did not receive notice that my written statement would be due today until today. I can send one with as many copies as you need if you would like. Q. If you would like to do that, it allows us to share with other members of the committee who may not be present the text of your remarks. And so if you pass that on to us, we'll share it with members and make it available to members. The other question is similar to what Representative Davies just asked. I'll ask it in a slightly different form. If I remember what you said correctly, you spoke about there being medical science evidence that this kind of program will tend to increase 11 sexual activity. Could you cite the source of that evidence? A. I do not have the cite with me at this time. Q. is there such evidence? Could you provide such a citation? A. I believe there is such evidence. Q. If you would submit that to us, we would be interested in having that for our consideration as well. A. One other element of this bill regards the privacy rights of the children, and those rights are guaranteed under Roe v. Wade that there is a privacy right. And these children are being asked in some schools to reveal the most intimate details of their life regarding their parents, their sexual proclivities, those kinds of things. We believe that the children have a right not to be forced to reveal to State authorities certain very private details of their lives, and this bill is designed to try to protect the rights of the children. Q. Okay. I don't want to lose the point I was mentioning, though. if you have such evidence that you can cite the source of that evidence, I would appreciate that you might submit it to the Chair, and again, we'll share that with members of the committee. You started your testimony by speaking about 12 an October 14th meeting? A. Yes.

Q. Was that October 14 of '87? A. Yes, 1987. Q. Okay. And the program that has been the focus of your testimony, is that program now in place in the school district?

A. It was voted on on October 14, 1987. As far as I know, it has been implemented. I don't know if it's still in operation in Downingtown, so I can't really answer that. I just know it was approved by the school board that night. Q. Do you live in that school district? A. No, I don't. Q. Do you— A. I practice law in Chester County and have clients in that area. Q. Do you have any sense of what the reaction of parents and students in that district has been since October 14th? Or you're not sure that the program was even put into place? A. My belief is that the program has been put into place. A number of parents have formed a group to try to fight the program, whether it's through the courts or through the legislature, because they feel strongly— 13 Q. Are you representing those parents? A. I am not representing those parents. Q. And you're not sure that what they're fighting in fact is in place? A. To the best of my knowledge, it was enacted and approved by the school board. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for being here, sir. MR. CONSIDINE: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I apologize as I go through the day if I chop off names as I did Michael's name. Our next scheduled witness is Mr. Robert Gyurik, who is president of United parents of Chester County. MR. GYURIK: Thank you, Honorable Representatives, for allowing me to speak before you today. My name is Robert Gyurik, and I'm the elected president of United Parents of Chester County. The involvement of our organization began in March of 1987 when concerned parents became aware of an impending intensive sexuality curriculum in the Downingtown Area School District. Since that time we have drawn members from three additional adjacent school districts. At a meeting in April of 1987, I presented the Downingtown School Board with a petition which 14 insisted that the proposed curriculum must: 1. Reinforce the traditional family values, especially that sexual intercourse outside of marriage is inappropriate behavior; and 2. Have abstinence as the focus of any curriculum, since promiscuity is at the core of the problems of teenage pregnancy, AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases. These two principles are in tune with policy papers from many sources, including the then U.S. Secretary of Education, the Surgeon General, the Pennsylvania Medical Society, to name but a few of the many reputable experts, and I think that answers, Representative Cowell, your question that you posed to Mr. Considine earlier. The petition was signed by over 1,900 Downingtown community parents after only 10 days in circulation. The curriculum which was adopted, however, did not contain these values. Mr. Considine will show in legal testimony from the school board president that this is true by self-admission, and I'll read that into the record, if I may, a little bit later. I'm afraid I must risk shocking some of you with some examples of the type of material now within our schools. For fourth and fifth grade, a book listed in 15 the bibliography of the final curriculum, and available to any teacher who wishes to use it, is Talking To Your Child About Sex, by Mary Calderone, the former director of planned Parenthood Federation of America. This is an extremely distasteful book. For 18-months to 3-year-old children it says, and you can turn to page 28, "What's this bump? That's your clitoris. What's it for? For feeling good when you touch it, like your brother's penis. That feels good, too, when he makes it stand up."

Or how about, "What is orgasm?" Turn to the next page, page 64. "When a person is masturbating, or being touched and loved by another person, they can reach a point of the most excitement and pleasure that is called an orgasm or, in slang, coming." And it goes on, "An orgasm feels wonderful." To go on. page 96, "Can two men make love? Yes, by being tender with each other and by using their hands and mouths and penises and anuses," and so forth. Page 127, "Is it okay to go all the way with oral sex or is that just to get ready for intercourse?" And you can look at the ages at the top of the pages and read the answer to that one. In the main resource book for grades 4, 5, and 6, Education For Sexuality, which I have a copy with me which we got at some difficulty, read the philosophy 16 of the author about the purpose of modern sex education. Read paragraph 4, page 401.

"Tonight I dare to suggest that the purpose of modern sex education, sex education in Epoch Two, will be to teach people how to promote sexual pleasure to a noncontradictory pleasure." Noncontradictory pleasure. That's his main goal. Another resource book is Family Life Education, written by planned parenthood. Talk about a conflict of interest. They make their livelihood, as do others, in the family planning industry - selling their services, distributing birth control devices, performing abortions on minors without their parents' consent. I wish I had more than five minutes to give more examples. The point is, without the protection that P.A.P.P.A gives, parents are helpless. We feel helpless against this barrage. We don't want to dictate to others what they teach their children. We don't. We want to decide for our own children. Our rights are being stepped on. Honorable Representatives, please help us. And I can read into the record the portion of the legal transcript which says which the school board president admitted that chastity or abstinence was not a value in this program, after I just read into the record that all 17 of these reputable medical sources say that it's necessary, we've got to have it. And this guy, by self- admission, says it's not in there; it's not a value. And I could read that to you, if you'd like, if anybody would like me to read that verbatim court reported testimony.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: If you wish to submit it for the record, we will, again, make it a part of the record and have it distributed. MR. GYURIK: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Is that the completion of your prepared remarks, sir? MR. GYURIK: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, thank you. We'll take questions from members. We have also been joined by Representative Vic Lescovitz. Are there questions? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. Since you're so close to that, and the question was unanswered before, what is the status of the program currently? A. It is in operation, fully in operation. Q. Fully in operation? A. Yes. Q. In the district? 18 A. Yes. in fact, I have the curriculum with me. And I have taken the two sources, of which there are many, many more, I have taken those right out of the curriculum itself. Q. And where is it, in what grades levels now? A. Fourth up. Q. Fourth up? A. Yes. Q. All the way through? A. Yes. I think they omit 10th grade. It's 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 11th, and I'm not sure about 12th. But it starts in 4th, yes, sir. Q. And that they are using all of the items that you submitted into evidence? A. These are teacher's resources, as I've mentioned. They're in the curriculum, they're in the schools. Q. Okay. They're in the curriculum in the schools, but as far as the use of them— A. The school is using them. Now, whether a teacher would choose to use them, they're a resource. They are in the school. They dwell within the school and they're available for a teacher to use that as a resource. Now, the main resource where I read the 19 philosophy of that author, that's the main resource. My wife saw a box of these going into the elementary school, I mean a box full of these resources, so they're generally recognized as being appropriate, yes. Q. Thank you. A. You're welcome. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Lescovitz. BY REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: (Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. I just want to follow up again. You're saying that this material is or is not being used by a particular school district? A. It is being used. Q. It's being taught in the class? A. It's listed in the curriculum. The teacher has a lot of leeway. For example, in seventh grade they have to teach up to at least 15 hours, 15 hours of this stuff. And so they have, at their liberty, a bunch of resources. Only having five minutes, I've only been able to touch two of those resources - two of the more reprehensible, but they're not, by any means, the only reprehensible ones. This is not— Q. Again, what you're saying is they, if they want to, they could use this material, is that correct? A. This is recommended in the curriculum as 20 appropriate materials for use in the classroom. It's there. Q. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Linton.

BY REPRESENTATIVE LINTON: (Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. Could you just give me, I guess as a parent, what is your position as to what schools should present in terms of sex education? A. Well, as I read in my testimony that I have before you, the two main things that they should do is really reinforce the traditional family values among the children, especially that sexual intercourse outside of marriage is inappropriate behavior, and we know that the experts agree that that should be done, and all the policy papers say that this is a necessary part of a curriculum.

And the other thing is to have abstinence as the focus of a curriculum, and if a curriculum doesn't have those two things, then the curriculum is really inappropriate. But once again, I reiterate, we're not in the position of trying to tell people what to teach their kids, but we don't want the schools teaching our kids things that invade our rights or that step on us. Q. That's the extent of what you think should be 21 taught or no further than that? A. Well, there are various ways to do that. We have recommended, in fact, this is in this transcript as well, we have recommended to the school board many, many different tried and tested programs around the country, one called "Sex Respect," another teens program that was used in Atlanta, programs that have been extremely successful and that have these two criteria. We consistently, and many, many people asked the school board, please, use these things. They're great. We would all agree with it and we'll drop all our objections if you include these. They're used in — one of them was used in 21 States with success called "Sex Respect," and they completely denied to even look at it.

I have eight letters from people from my group that we know were unanswered, and the school board came back and said, well, we never got any letters, and here I have eight, one of them is my own, that wasn't answered. It's a four-page letter evaluating the curriculum for them as we thought what was wrong with it in terms of these two objectives. We never even got a reply. Nobody got a reply that I know of. REPRESENTATIVE LINTON: No further questions. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Lescovitz. BY REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: (Of Mr. Gyurik) 22 Q. To follow up, I just want to make sure I know where your group is coming from. You want to limit what resource a teacher shall have in teaching a class? is that where you're coming from or not? in other words, do you want to have a school board specify which books will be used in which class, relating to all subjects so if a history teacher wants to bring in an outside book, that teacher will not be able to teach out of that resource or are you just doing that in the text of just health related classes?

A. Well, i think I know where your question is going. We don't want to dictate programs to people. We're not in the business of being censors. What we want to do is, number one, to be informed. I think that's one of the basic principles of P.A.P.P.A. is that the parents should be informed and know what's in there. And the other thing is to elicit the support of the parents for the programs by having them say, yes, I want my kid to take this. Sign a little note, no sweat. No, we're not in the business of censorship. We don't want to dictate what teachers can or cannot teach. We want to know. And also, we don't want things done behind our backs. We don't want our privacy or our family lives invaded, and that's what's being done, and 23 as you'll see in testimony today, that has been done over and over and over again.

Q. Yes, I understand when you're talking about this related class. My question is with other curriculum. in other words, do you want to have the overall approval of information, if there's an election coming up and someone has pamphlets from a candidate, do you want to be told that in advance that we are going to use material that we have from Democratic candidates, Republican candidates, Socialist candidates, so on and so forth? Because there are some controversial individuals that run for election and they use specific types of material. I just want to know is your association asking that those be limited, or are you just limiting your field to health care?

A. Well, I believe that P.A.P.P.A. is pretty explicit in where the concept of P.A.P.P.A. lies. No, it isn't a history course. It mentions sexuality education. I mean, that's paragraph 1, and I've studied it pretty thoroughly. No, it will not infringe on history or math or political science or any of those things. Just where it gets into issues related to the health of the child, the sexuality education of the child, privacy issues, things like that. Things like that. Things or areas that the teacher should typically reserve for the family 24 that's appropriate as the parent as the primary educator of their children. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Fox. REPRESENTATIVE FOX: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. just a brief question. BY REPRESENTATIVE FOX: {Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. Are parents now who are in that district able to opt-out if they want to have their children not be included? A. Yes, they are. The opt-out program, once again, is suicide and issues like that, issues that are really inappropriate for a fourth or fifth grade child. The opt-out provision is really a cop-out. What it does is it doesn't give the parents an active responsibility to be in lead with the school. Opting in does that. They say, yes, I've seen the materials, or, I trust you for the materials, and here's my signature, please allow my child to participate. Q. So you think this bill will give you more involvement? A. Of course it will. REPRESENTATIVE FOX: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Davies. 25 BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. How many have opted out? A. I don't have that figure. Q. Thank you. A. I know specific people. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: We've also been joined by Representative Chaka Fattah from here in Philadelphia. Sir, I have several questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Gyurik) Q. The previous speaker referred to a gentleman who at the October 14th meeting was denied the opportunity to speak. Were you that person? A. Yes, I was. I was one of them. There were many. And that's in this record, this court reported record. Q. You suggested that your comments about the policy papers from the Secretary of Ed, U.S. Secretary of Ed, Surgeon General and Pennsylvania Medical Society might be responsive to a question I'd asked the previous gentleman. A. Yes. Q. It did not. The policy papers speak to principles of abstinence and reinforcing traditional 26 family values. The previous gentleman spoke about a medical science evidence suggesting that a sex ed program will increase sexual activity, and those policy papers don't speak to that issue at all. A. No. They speak — he had a two-pronged question there. The medical science speaking to increased sexual activity being promulgated by certain school programs was dealt with very nicely by a — it's now in a book by Stan Weed, Mr. Olsen, and that was reported in the New York Times in 1986 where they showed that increased involvement, especially in school-based health clinics, led to, and it was very interesting, no decrease in pregnancy — I mean, no decrease in live-born children, however an increase in pregnancy and a tremendous increase in abortion.

So in other words, and the name of the article in the New York Times, was "Curbing Births, Not Pregnancy," and that appeared in the New York Times. I have a copy of that article which I could submit for you. Q. You are a resident of the Downing town School District this morning? A. Correct. Q. And in what grades are your children involved? A. First, third, and sixth. 27 Q. Okay. So it's only the sixth grader who would be at that level where this program is actually in place? A. Exactly. The others are coming along, so we have a vested interest in keeping this intact. Q. You cite a number of objectionable statements which come from some of the resource materials available. Has your sixth grader been exposed to that material in the sixth grade level? A. Not yet. Q. To the best of your knowledge, and I understand this material is part of the resource library which is available to teachers, to the best of your knowledge, has any teacher at any level in your school district said things in class or distributed materials in class which reflect those objectionable items which you've cited in your testimony? A. Well, we're going to have some other people from Downingtown which are going to testify more to those things that have happened directly to their children. However, remember, the program has just started. This is the first year of implementation. They're going pretty careful. They know that we've created a big stir. I mean, 1,900 names on a petition, I have the names with me. I mean, I won't enter it into the record, it's just 28 too big, but I'll show it to you. And they're tippy- toeing . But the thing is, as time wears on, these materials are the usage — when you're dealing with a sex ed program that requires 15 hours just in the sex ed program alone, and then health education on top of that that also deals with sex ed, you're dealing with hours and hours that a teacher has to fill in. And if you know anything, and of course you know, teachers change their routine from year in and year out and they try to get to something that's less boring, less routine, and they dig up more and more materials and they change things around.

The principle here to me is not where they're using it. The thing is, it's in the school, it's in the Intermediate Unit. It's available. In fact, copies of the book where I read the philosophy of the author has techniques for abortion in, I mean, the four different types of abortion and it shows drawings on how it's done and how the instruments are inserted. My wife saw a box of these go into the elementary school, so this is really recommended. If they don't use it, I'd be surprised. Q. I understand the material is sitting on a shelf, at least. The question was, to the best of your knowledge, has any teacher said anything or distributed any materials which have reflected the items or the 29 particular points that you have found objectionable? A. These particular points in this item? No.

But you'll see testimony later about other items. Q. Okay. You come from one of 501 school districts, although you indicated that your United Parents group has obtained members from other school districts. A. Yes. Q. Again, to the best of your knowledge, is this curriculum of which you are critical being used in any of the other 500 school districts of the Commonwealth? And if it is, could you cite which ones? A. Okay. The values and Choices curriculum which is in the seventh grade is either under imminent implementation or is already implemented, I believe, in Unionville, Chadds Ford, and perhaps Tredyffrin-Easttown. Now, that's probably pretty much speculation. I've pretty much concentrated on what was going on in Downing town. You'll hear testimony later on about Owen J. Roberts and so forth, some of the adjacent school districts. Their curriculum are different. I mean, it's sort of like a shell game. Some of the books in Tredyffrin-Easttown are much more objectionable than this one we have here, and they were retrieved from 30 classrooms. They were taken out of classrooms where the teacher said, "please don't bring them home." In fact, there's evidence to show on the face plate that they weren't meant to be taken home or shown to parents, except they were retrieved by certain surreptitious methods, I would imagine. But anyway, we saw these things, and they're very similar to this type of thing. They might not be identical though. Q. And the last question, I'm always curious as to how the process is working at the local level because we have essentially a system in the State that provides for local control by locally elected officials. Subsequent to your October 14th meeting where this curriculum was adopted, were any of the school board members who were running in the November election

defeated? A. That's interesting because the election happened sort of in the middle of all this. Q. No, the election happened after the October 14th meeting. A. it was November. it was just right after that meeting, yes. There were no candidates opposed at that time. As you know, it takes a while to get a candidate and maybe we were remiss in not putting somebody right in there. However, it was really 31 interesting that two of the candidates, the principal exponents and proponents of this curriculum, were elected and one of them already resigned. Was elected in November and resigned. It seems like — two of these, Nancy Glenn and another woman, I forget her name right now, they were in to get the program voted in and now they're gone. Quite a coincidence. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you very much for being here. ^. MR. GYURIK: Thank you very much for the opportunity. Thanks. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Mr. Edward Sickles, from Fort Washington, Pennsylvania. Sir, go ahead. MR. SICKLES: Good morning. My name is Edward Sickles. I'm a teacher of multihandicapped- learning and adjustment program in the Montgomery County Intermediate Unit. As a person diagnosed with a learning disability, I have served on the Governors' Developmental Disabilities Planning and Advisory Council, and I am a member of the Council for Exceptional Children and the Pennsylvania State Education Association. I am speaking today not only as a 32 professional in the field of special education for ten- plus years, but as the parent of a foster child who is in high school who has a learning disability, but as a consumer who has suffered from a learning disability titled minimal brain dysfunction, diagnosed some 30 years ago. I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak to you today, the distinguished members of the House of Representatives, on the issues that are germane to the special education student in the special education classroom.

There are many areas of concern that have a negative impact on the provision of quality education for all school aged individuals as well as the quality of education for our special education students. This impact will be felt by the passage of House Bill 2277, and I must register a hope that you will reconsider taking any action on this bill.

I would like to address certain issues that are within this bill. The first section is 2505-A, prior written consent of parent for sex education. There is no curriculum in the State of Pennsylvania that requires prior parental consent for student participation. I wonder how many other courses will be opened up if this is implemented. Are we opening up a Pandora's box? However, I believe the parents should be given an option, 33 an opportunity to review curriculum that we use in the classroom. I believe that we must work as a team in the development of education for all children. According to Chapter 5 regulations, Section 5.10a(d) , already requires parental permission for pupil participation in the AIDS curriculum and AIDS instruction. A precedent has been set for the process of written requests for excusals. A precedent has been set for the process of written requests for excusals — I'm sorry, I'm repeating here — and should be sufficient for all involved, rather than requiring every parent to provide a written permission for a child to take a sex education class.

I would like to then address Section 2506-A. I am very concerned about this because of being a special ed teacher, that this law would harm other laws that are in existence. Under public Law 9 4-142, the Education of Handicapped Children Act, local education agencies are required to provide testing for student placement not limited to intelligence testing. The bill clearly eliminates classes for emotionally disturbed youngsters and young adults which require testing and evaluation of the total child. Public Law 94-142 is not insensitive to the child's right, however it sets forth the procedures and regulations which protect the child. The bill goes 34 well beyond protective measures. Chapter 22, Section 3341.13 of the Pennsylvania School Code, under Evaluation, paragraph (3) states: "information from sources other than ability or achievement tests, including information from the parents concerning the physical condition, sociocultural background and adaptive behavior in home and school of the person, shall be considered in recommending assignments. No one test or type of test may be used as sole criterion for development of the Individualized Educational Program."

The lack of appropriate testing would severely limit the ability of school officials to place students in appropriate classroom settings suited to their individual emotional and educational needs, under this law, the schools would be unable to identify and therefore assist those students who are emotionally disturbed or socially maladjusted. I then would like to address 2507-A. I think it's the job of the professional to offer the child alternatives. And we can look at dictionaries, and I looked at a bunch of them, to get a definition of what a teacher is, but a teacher is not a preacher. A teacher is one who will listen and facilitate education. I am neither a proponent of abortion or a pro-lifer, however, 35 I hope that I will always be able to look at the problem and talk to a child in serious crises and resolve a sex- related problem. The day I am told I cannot teach or at least facilitate will be the day I leave the profession I really love. When a teenager—

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, you have just about a half a minute to sum things up. MR. SICKELS: Okay. When a teenager is overwhelmed by a sex-related problem and is receiving no guidance from home because of a case of incest or child abuse, I hope that I can help that child without feeling the pressure with a complaint, as may occur in Section 2510-A.

And just in conclusion, this bill has many flaws and ideas that will retard the growth of today's youth. The far-reaching ramifications would cripple the schools' operation as we know it today. The checks and balances system required alone would virtually lead to additional requirements and restriction in all areas of education. It is frightening to think that if this bill should come to fruition that it would be disastrous for all children in our free educational system. And furthermore, I wouldn't want to be the first person to state to a sexually active teenager, call your State Representative for the answers about your sex-related 36 problems.

Thank you.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. Are there questions? Representative Freind. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Sickels) Q. Thank you. I appreciate your testimony. just a couple questions.

2505, Prior Written Consent, do you support the right of a parent to opt their children out of a sex education course? A. Yes. Q. So in other words, you just have a problem with the form? You don't like opt-in, you want opt-out? A. Yeah, I don't like the idea that you're asking a parent to say that I want to be in a course, that I have to be in a course. I would say, yes, I am in favor of having opting out but I am not in favor of saying that you have to, you know, send me a note to say you can take the course. Q. Why is that? Just for mechanical reasons you're opposed to that? A. Yes. Yes. I'm in a high school and we've done a lot of things this year and having parents return forms, and it does not happen. 37 Q. Let me ask you a question. You're in high school, right? A. Yes. Q. Football, for example. A. Um-hum.

Q. It's an opt-in, isn't it? A. Correct. Q. It works, doesn't it? A. It works. Q. Field trips in most school districts are opt- in.

A. Um-hum. Q. That works, A. It does. Q. Okay, protection of Pupil Rights, and I understand your concern. Are you aware that the bill specifically states that nothing will change the existing law on special education? A. Well, my question is, when we look at that bill, are we talking about sex education or special education? I think they are two diverse issues here, and I do not agree with putting — I don't agree with this bill because it has special education in it. Why are we singling out special education? And I'm very concerned about that. 38 I have 14 letters from my 14 students that are very concerned about that issue. I deal with multi- handicapped kids and their letters are addressed to you, which I will be presenting to you at another time, which I will be happy to give copies to everybody else. But there are letters that they have written to say that they do have rights to know what's going on in sex education. I don't think that we are being fair by singling them out.

Q. I'm a little confused. A. Okay. Q. What this section does, 2506-A, bans the number of blanket tests. A. That's correct. Q. It goes on to say, however, nothing in this section in any way will change the existing law with respect to testing for special education. A. I realize that. Q. So we make it very clear that we're not impinging at all on special education. A. But let's go back to — I realize what you're saying, but again, I want to just call your attention to the Pennsylvania Code. I think it's very, very important that again, why are we doing limitations on special education students? I don't understand, again— 39 Q. We're not. A. Well, that's where I have a difference. Q. What we're trying to do, to help people with your concerns, is to make it clear that this section in no way relates to the existing test, the existing

procedures for special education. A. Yeah, but that's not — I've given this, and this bill has been looked at by 35 teachers at our school, and all 35 came up with that same complaint about special education. Why are they singling out special education? And I really don't have that answer in that bill. I think it's very confusing.

Q. You would rather us take that section out and make it unclear that special education is— A. Yeah, I would rather that section not be put in at all, personally. I don't see why we have to single out special education. Q. Okay. Just a couple other questions. A. Okay. Q. Prohibited Health Services. Are you stating that you think it's the responsibility, regardless of how you feel on abortion, contraception, et cetera, and we're not talking about education and teaching people in class about these issues, the bill prohibits specific activity on the part of the school districts such as assisting in 40 transportation, recommendations and assisting abortions and contraceptive measures, et cetera, specific measures. Do you think that's the right of a school district to be specifically involved in directing a student? A. I think that we should be teaching the kids the options. I don't think we should be sitting there and saying there is only one option. And I'm concerned with— Q. Well, of course, let's stay on this section first. A. Okay. Q. This section has nothing to do with teaching it whatsoever. A. Um-hum. Q. It says what you can't do is refer for abortions or contraceptives or transport, take a specific recommendation to a specific doctor at a specific clinic, and so forth. Do we agree that schools shouldn't be doing that? A. I have difficulty with that, and I really do because I've dealt with kids that are in emotional crisis and have no parent involvement at all. I have dealt with five emancipated students in my program, five emancipated students who were sexually active. I am not saying that I would transport, but I think my students are entitled 41 to know the options and where they can get the counseling from. The telephone book isn't always the answer, and they need some guidance. When you see the letters that my students have written to you, you will know that they are deeply disabled. And to sit there and say, open up the phone book, is not an answer either. Who are they going to get it from if they're not going to get it from the person they trust the most? And the bottom line is, if the teacher is the one they trust the most, there is no parental involvement, there is no clergy involvement, where do they get the answers from? The telephone book doesn't give it to them.

Q. So what you're saying, in certain cases the teacher ought to take over the responsibility of the parent? A. In certain cases the teacher has to take over the responsibilities of the parent because there is no other adult in that child's life, and maybe that's what we should be looking at. Maybe instead of talking about sex education we should be talking about totally different issues. But who is going to take over that responsibility? Are you, Representative Freind, going to talk to these kids and work with these kids when nobody else is there? 42 Q. Well, remember, we're only dealing with a specific section that deals with direct action on transporting or recommending specific action that a student should take. A. Right, but we're dealing with the word "recommending" there, too, you know, not just transporting. Q. Help me out on this one where I have a problem. A. Okay. Q. As we both know, present law requires a parent to attend to the health and welfare of his or her minor children. And as a matter of fact, if they fail in that responsibility, they can be subject to very, very stiff criminal penalties. And the problem I have, and maybe you can help me here, is when the school district gets involved in taking direct action on an abortion or contraception or things which can have a direct impact on the health of that student without the parents getting involved, then don't we contradict the existing law with the parents responsible for that health, under criminal penalties? A. Okay. Again, I'm talking in very specific terms of an emancipated minor. As I said, I've dealt with five of them. Then who is the person responsible? 43 And I remember something from being involved in the Jaycees, "if not you, who?" And I think that's really important. Who is going to take the bull by the horn and help these children or these emancipated minors? Q. And that, of course, depends on what's

emancipated. One other question, because I don't want to take up much more time. You seem to have — keep in mind, and you've reviewed the bill so you're aware of this, that the bill in no way, in no way whatsoever, says what should be taught in a sex education course. What it does say is the same thing that our existing AIDS regulations say, which you in your testimony seem to support, is that in sex education you must stress that the only completely reliable way to refrain from unwanted pregnancy, venereal disease or sexually transmitted AIDS is through abstinence. Now, remember, this has nothing to do with moral values. This happens to be a fact which no one can dispute.

Do you have a problem with emphasizing that fact? A. In many respects an emotionally disturbed secondary student finds one of the only ways, and I am doing this from my knowledge rather than direct materials, other than the fact that I do have some direct materials that also will emphasize that and I can present 44 you with, states in different terms that I'm going to use that our special populations are successful with sex. Now, they are acting out with sex because they are not failing with sex. Does that make sense to— Q. I don't even know what it means. A. Okay. I am saying to you my feelings that a special ed and emotionally disturbed student, that most are sexually active and most are involved with relationships because they have not failed in those things. They have not failed in sex. Most of the kids that I am dealing with are kids that are failure-ridden, and this whole issue of teaching, I'd rather teach this child about sex and sex issues and teach him so he has knowledge rather than learning out on the street.

Q. Which has nothing — my only question is, whether it's a special ed student or any other student, do you have any objection to stressing in a sex course the inescapable fact that the only way you can be completely safe from unwanted pregnancy, venereal disease or AIDS is through abstinence? I mean, don't special ed students, as well as any other student, deserve to have the truth stressed to them? A. They deserve to have the truth but also a complete truth, not a false truth of one issue. I think we have to look at the total issue. 45 Q. And, of course, you're aware that nothing in the bill prohibits after stressing that abstinence is the only safe way, they can go into anything else the particular district or teacher wants to do? You're aware of that? A. Um-hum.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Let me just clarify and follow up on special ed.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Sickels) Q. You spoke from the standpoint of a teacher being able to work with and speak with a student. A. Um-hum. Q. My understanding of the bill, and correct me if you interpret it differently, is that even if you were a school nurse you would not be able to cooperate in a referral for pregnancy testing. is that your understanding? A. Yes. Q. And even if — you spoke about emancipated students, but even if it was a student who came to you with a parent and you were the school nurse and asked for some assistance with respect to appropriate pregnancy 46 testing, you would not be able to cooperate in— A. Under this law I would not be able to cooperate, and I feel it is really important to open up to the child for — again, these are children who need guidance, okay? And I really think that we should be able to open up the different options that are available to them. Where to get the pregnancy test and so on is very, very important, and I think this bill would cripple any kind of discussion in that vein. There's no question about that. At least that's the way I perceive it. Q. What is the age range of special ed students with which you deal at the high school level? A. Fourteen to 21. Q. So you're dealing with 19- and 20- and 21- year-olds? A. Correct. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Our next scheduled witness is Mr. Allen R. Polsky, from Havertown, Pennsylvania. MR. POLSKY: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and other distinguished members of the Education Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to present my views 47 regarding House Bill 2277, which was introduced by Mr. Freind, the primary sponsor. As Mr. Freind's opponent in the upcoming election, I and members of my staff have read and re-read the bill. Yes, Steve, I have read the bill, and, Steve, it stinks.

It is my belief that this bill, using the guise of protecting pupils and parents, is, in reality, a thinly veiled attempt to eliminate sex education in our schools. I refer you to Section 2503-A, subsection b. Quote, "Nothing in this section shall require a public hearing for the elimination or curtailment of any sex education instruction or any curricular material used as a basis for sex education instruction." What about the rights of parents who believe that education is the number one weapon in the battle against AIDS, as well as other sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancies, and incest? Parents would be deprived of any say should a school board decide to remove a sex education program.

Gentlemen, I now refer you to Section 2509-A, subsection a. "No Commonwealth agency shall have the authority to require that school districts adopt or implement sex education instruction nor shall any Commonwealth agency have the authority to prescribe any mandatory curriculum or other requirements for sex 48 education instruction." Why not? We all know that sex education has traditionally been the parents' responsibility, but I ask you, where has it gotten us? Many children are being victimized by the very people charged with teaching and protecting them - their parents. Teenagers are still becoming pregnant. One dysfunctional family creates two or more dysfunctional families in the next generation, and on and on.

Our society has just begun to deal with these issues. There was a time not too long ago when child abuse, alcoholism, rape and incest were not discussed in refined company, but now we have hotlines and agencies to help our young victims. But in order to take advantage of these services or prevent their need, they must be taught to recognize abnormal behavior. Our children must be taught that no one has the right to violate their bodies. They must be taught how their bodies function so they have the strength from knowledge to just say no, as Mr. Freind espouses. I ask you to set aside this bill. I don't see parents' and pupils' rights being protected. I do see severe restrictions which are unnecessary and expensive to implement, which is also a concern that was expressed to me by the Haver ford Township School Administration. Basically, I do believe that parents 49 should have the opportunity to provide input into the establishment of a sex education program, but not as outlined in House Bill 2277. In conclusion, I agree wholeheartedly with James Madison when he stated, "A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both." in my opinion, House Bill 2277 is both. Thank you.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Are there questions? Representative Freind. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Polsky) Q. Al, it's always good to see you and I'm more than happy to help your campaign by asking you a couple of questions. A. Thank you. Q. Now, are you aware that the reason for public hearings before a curriculum is adopted is not on the issues of whether or not to adopt a curriculum but for disclosure and for questions and answers as to what is involved in the curriculum? it's an educational format. A. Um-hum. Q. So I imagine you don't have a problem with public hearings? 50 A. Absolutely not. Q. What you're saying is that there should be a public hearing before it's struck? A. Exactly. Q. Okay. Despite the fact that there doesn't need an explanation of what's in the curriculum, and certainly a parent, such as you, would be concerned about that and you would certainly be at the school board meeting? A. Absolutely. Q. Okay. A. But let me just say one thing. This bill, I believe, in my opinion, came about because of what was just discussed prior to this, the material that was available in the sex education, which I also found distasteful. However, I think this was a knee-jerk reaction to that curriculum. I don't think it's being implemented in any school districts of the 501. I'm not really quite sure of that, but I don't think we need a bill that just is a knee-jerk reaction to one I believe was a mistake, as well as you do, and I don't think that

it's necessary to go into all this and restricting and the costs involved. I didn't get involved because of the time restrictions, but the costs involved— Q. Excuse me for a minute. My question 51 specifically was on one section. A. Okay. Q. And that section was of course that you believe that there should be a hearing before to adopt a curriculum. You'd like a hearing afterwards if they're going to drop the sex education. A. Exactly.

Q. Okay. You also asked about the section, "No Commonwealth agency shall have the authority to mandate sex education." You're aware right now that there is no mandating whatsoever of sex education in Pennsylvania, except for the AIDS? A. I am aware, yes, except for the AIDS. Q. And as the chairman pointed out, this is a legislature which has always believed in local control, and I imagine you support that concept too of local control, or are you saying that you would want to mandate by State authority— A. I would want it mandated by State authority with the control in concert with the parents and the school boards. Q. So would you rather mandate that by a law or by regulation, like New jersey does? A. Well, I'd have to look into that. I can't answer that at this time. 52 Q. But you want to take away that local control by mandating it— A. No, no. I don't want to take away local control. Q. The local control to decide whether or not you have sex education courses? A. That"s correct. Q. You want to take that away. Fine. The other question, you're aware, in reading the bill, that in no way does this bill tell any school district which chooses to have sex education what the core content and the curriculum should be. Do you have a problem with the requirement which we also have in our AIDS regulation that regardless of what else you teach, you have to stress the fact that abstinence is the only safe way to avoid pregnancy, venereal disease and AIDS?

A. It's true, Steve, but it hasn't worked since Adam and Eve. Q. So what we do is we don't tell them that. incidently, I don't believe Adam and Eve were aware of AIDS. I think that's fairly recent. A. I would think so. But abstinence was taught then as well, but it didn't work. It's nice to say abstinence, and it makes sense, and you're right, you can't argue with that, but this is the American society 53 and it just hasn't worked. I would like to stress abstinence and you say what about no sexual intercourse before marriage. It doesn't seem to work. Q. Excuse me for a minute. Let's be specific. I asked you if you object to the requirement that we have to stress in our courses that abstinence is the only completely reliable way to refrain from AIDS, unwanted pregnancy and venereal disease. You can teach anything else you want after that, but do you have a problem with that requirement? A. No. Q. Oh, fine then. We're pretty much in agreement on this bill. Always good to see you, Al. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Those who are interested, the Polsky-Freind debate will continue at another location in the near future. MR. POLSKY: October 12th. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you for being with us, sir. Our next scheduled witness is Cathleen Kivett, whose testimony will be read by Wendy Gyurik. And while she is coming forward, let me 54 acknowledge receipt of written testimony from three individuals who are not scheduled as witnesses today: Elizabeth Treacy, from Kenmore Avenue in Glenside; Gloria Kianoury, from jenkintown, PA; and Maria Nolan from Glenbrook Road in Meadowbrook. We thank them for their testimony. (See index for copies of the submitted testimonies of Elizabeth Treacy, Gloria Kianoury, and Maria Nolan.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, go ahead. MS. KIVETT: Good morning. I made a few phone calls and I'm able to speak for myself today. I'm Cathleen Kivett and I am the mother of eight children that presently exist in the Owen J. Roberts School District in pottstown. Each spring a film on body changes is presented to our fourth and fifth graders. In addition to the film, 8 by 10 diagrams of the male and female reproductive organs are distributed out to our 9-year- olds, who are instructed to identify and write down all the anatomical parts. The boy's film, which is a segment of The Body Human series, is introduced by the Rod Stewart music version, "If you like my body and you think I'm sexy, come along and let me know." As the film draws to a conclusion, the lyrics go, "Tonight's the night, 55 baby, it's gonna be all right, nothing's gonna stop us now." This is fourth and fifth graders. In many instances, children receive their first indoctrination to sex education through the school rather than their parents, and most parents are unaware of such instruction. No consideration was given to the maturity level of each student or parents' views and opinions on such matters. As responsible parents, I vehemently feel our rights to instruct our children on such matters should be left to the discretion of parents as to when, where, and how much information our children should be exposed to at their stage of development.

Conversations on sex education between parent and child leads the way to comfortable long-range communication. if the school interrupts this process, the school and friends may ultimately be our children's primary sources of information. Many teachers and administrators feel if the permission slip were sent home many young students would be deprived of such pertinent information, justifiably so. There are many responsible parents that would preview all materials and films and prefer that their strong traditional and spiritual values accompany and be an integral part of their sex education instruction for their children. Such morals and values that I speak of 56 are never presented in a classroom setting. Parents are also concerned about the choices of topics presented in 11th grade classrooms. The philosophy clearly states, and this is from the curriculum, "Each individual builds his own set of values, standards to guide his life." This follows the statement that the more information our children receive, the greater the chance, the chance, that their choices will be acceptable to society. We're leaving our children's future to chance.

Establishing values, a philosophy of life, seems to be the priority in this particular program. Contemporary social problems, including incest, deviate sex behavior, homosexuality, transsexuality, and prostitution are some of the topics under discussion for nine weeks. Human sexuality follows for the next nine weeks. The goals and objectives in this area, and I quote again from the 11th grade health curriculum, "The students will be able to comprehend the positive and negative outcome of sex in their lives and be able to choose alternatives suitable to them. Five stages of sexual intercourse and a discussion on masturbation in co-ed classrooms are also part of this segment. Some of these topics assume young people are having sex. Such topics can only convey and 57 encourage early sexual experimentation and lead to feelings of guilt, depression, and possible pregnancy situations. They also break down barriers of modesty and self-respect for one another. The next nine weeks focus on marriage and the family. Parents are not convinced that the educational benefits our 16-year-olds derive from debating the advantages and disadvantages of premarital sex, living together before marriage, abortion, contraceptives and the use of condoms for the prevention and spread of AIDS. The philosophy of this course is to challenge our youth to choose, develop and sustain values by clearly reviewing all the alternatives. Our children need guidance, not choices, at this age. I have spent many months researching and compiling information regarding the effects of progressive and contemporary health and sex education programs throughout the nation. It is with much concern and sadness I have learned the devastating and destructive influences and effects such permissive, liberal and humanistic teachings have had on our youth over the past 20 years. The statistics overwhelmingly indicate an escalated rate of pregnancy, abortion, depression, and suicide annually.

What is being done to curtail these '*i 58 frightening numbers? From what I have observed, not only at Owen J. but schools throughout the State of Pennsylvania, we are introducing more suicide prevention classes, expanding and mandating frequent explicit and in-depth sex education in co-ed classes, centering teenage discussions and reports on all aspects of deviant social and sexual behavior, promoting projects that present a mockery of marriage, pregnancy and family, and encouraging our youth to decide what's best for them with little regard for family values or rules of society.

Because of the diversity of students' background in public education, schools decline from instilling standards of right and wrong and presenting guidelines on any moral issues, yet ponder and contemplate why so many teenagers stray from family tradition and conformity within our society. Parents need to be instrumental in providing an atmosphere in school that reflects, compliments, and reinforces home values. Thank you for reviewing our request. In making your final decision, please consider the many years parents have devoted to their children and allow us, especially during these years of stress and uncertainty, to continue our responsibility in raising emotionally well-balanced and healthy citizens. 59 All I would like to see personally, for myself and my children, is that — I'm not asking that you agree with what I said here today, any of my concepts or any of my values. I'm just asking you to please give me the right to say no, opt my children out of this class. Not opt them out, sign them out. I don't want my children sitting in libraries. I have a 16-year-old this year sitting in a library, and I had one last year. And it's very unfair to these young people to punish them for my beliefs and my husband's beliefs. And that's where I stand on this issue.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, do you have a copy of that testimony? MS. KIVETT: I'm sorry, at the last minute, I really didn't plan, with all that was going on— CHAIRMAN COWELL: It would help us, again, to disseminate your materials to all members of the committee. MS. KIVETT: I could have it in 24 hours for you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: If you would send us even one copy and we'll copy them. MS. KIVETT: I'll do that. Okay. That will be fine. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Do we have questions 60 from members? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Ms. Kivett) Q. In that opting out, how many opted out and were they all without other instruction? A, Unfortunately, my daughter was the only one. There were other parents, I would say at least 20 of them, that would have preferred to do this the same way that I know of, but because of the resistance from the child and the unhappy situation at home, it made it impossible. Also, while my child was in the library, she was designated a certain place to sit, and all those that entered the library were told not to speak to her, she's taking health. So she was really the subject of a lot of controversy last year.

Q. But there was no instruction? A. There was — they were given a book and they had certain topics that she could do. Now, there were certain topics that she gave that I disapproved of and I did go down and I did speak to the — the health teacher wouldn't speak to me at this point, so she more or less told my daughter, threw up her arms and said, "pick any topic. Do anything you want." So she really didn't want to speak to me as to find out what I really felt that 61 health should be for my daughter in 11th grade. Q. And is she going through that again this year? A. I have another daughter now. She's a senior, I have a junior this year. This is a required course, so she's sitting in the library this year. Q. Thank you. A. Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Lescovitz. BY REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: (Of Ms. Kivett) Q. I just want to make sure, you're not opposed to sex education in the schools? You're opposed to — you'd rather have an opt-in instead of an opt-out, is that it? A. Yes. I would like to say, I do not approve of this material. I am doing this type of education at home for my children. I would rather them take another course, such as a computer, a business, a language, a science course, and not a health course. Q. So again, it's not really an opt-in/opt-out, you just prefer that course not be mandated to your student? A. Exactly. Q. And she would be able to take a different 62 course— A. A different course, right. Q. —if she doesn't want to take that one. A. Yes. Q. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: We've been joined by Representative Taylor and Representative Kosinski. Representative Taylor, a question? REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Yes. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Kivett) Q. Is it possible in your school district, if she opts-out does she opt-out of the entire course? A. I opt her out of the entire course. I could take segments if I wanted to do it that way, but I thought it was in the best interests of my daughter to keep her out, being that there were so many issues in this program that I disapproved of, to keep her out the entire year instead of drawing emphasis on her every couple weeks. Q. Okay. A. So she was out entirely. Q. So when she did her project or whatever it was that she had to do for her credit for that course, was that evaluated, was that looked at by anyone? A. Very quickly, very quickly, because a lot of 63 the material I could see she even took verbatim from the textbook, and there was no mention that she plagiarized. I mean, it was just, okay, you did it, here's some paper, here's something written, fine, I'll give you 25 out of 25.

Q. And how many days a week was she required to sit in there?

A. I believe health was three days a week. Q. Three days a week? A. Um-hum. Q. For a year or— A. For an entire year, from September to June. Q. For an entire year? A. Exactly. Q. And there was no opportunity for a substitute. But in this particular bill, if this particular bill passes, do you feel that it will correct the situation that you have? A. Yes, definitely. I will have the choice to say I would rather my child not take 11th grade health class, since it's not mandated by the State of Pennsylvania, since it's not — I want to be responsible for saying that she does not have to be in that class because I previewed the material and I felt that this material was not in the best interest of my child. 64 Q. Thank you very much. A. Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, just a couple quick questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Kivett) Q. in which school district do you live? A. Owen j. Roberts in pottstown. Q. And this curriculum to which you find objection, how long has it been in use? A. I believe 10 years. Q. Okay. So it's not a new phenomenon. A. Well, when it first came in, from what I've heard speaking to some of the older parents there, there was a lot of controversy. A lot of parents were very upset. They thought it was very progressive, just too much to handle in a very small town at the time, which Bucktown was, but it was approved nonetheless. Q. You indicated that your daughter is the only one opting out at this point. A. Yes, she is. Q. What's been the experience over the past several years? Have other students opted out? A. Not that I recall. Like I said, there's a 65 lot of pressure with parents with children. You're living with a very unhappy teenager, and most of our fights that we have at home over frivolous little things end up with the health program. Q. You indicated that you made a study of the sex ed stuff throughout the nation and then you proceeded to say that throughout the country, throughout Pennsylvania, we were doing a number of things, and one that caught my eye was making a mockery of marriage and family, et cetera. A. Urn-hum. Q. I'm sure the exact text is in your written remarks. Can you cite other school districts where this is occurring? A. I don't know for sure if it's in Downing town or whatever, but they do have a situation where the students carry an egg around, and being the mother of five teenagers and talking to them about how they feel and what they're receiving from this type of instruction, it's a joke. I mean, they just feel — they don't even know what responsibility is. This has nothing to do with what married life is all about. It's an easy A. It's not teaching our children responsibility, relationship, love, commitment, none of that. It's an egg. You cannot equate a pregnancy with an egg. 66 Q. So that's what you meant when you said making a mockery of marriage? A. It is a mockery. And they call it, strangely enough, a mocked wedding ceremony where they have a pretend minister come in. They dress up and they go through the ritual. I don't think that's an appropriate approach for instruction to marriage, personally. Q. And that's part of the program—

A. That's definitely part of the program. Q. —that you objected to? A. Well, yes, that's part of the program I object to. Q. Which nobody else has opted out? A. Exactly. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. Our next witness is Marsha Sullivan, a parent in the Tredyffrin-Easttown School District. REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: Mr. Chairman, can I just have a clarification from you? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sure. REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: Under the interrogation by Mrs. Taylor, I thought I heard it put in the record that this bill would eliminate the students' requirement to take a health class. is that true or not? That was my interpretation of the legislation. 67 CHAIRMAN COWELL: One of the reasons we're having these hearings is to listen to how people interpret the legislation. You might speak to the author or other proponents of the legislation to determine the intent. I'm not going to make a judgment about what the impact will be right now. We're hearing different things. REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Go ahead. MS. M. SULLIVAN: I've been married for 26 years. We have a 25-year-old son who is a National Merit scholar married and working as an engineer. Our second child is a college senior and has been the top student in her class the past three years. Our third child is a daughter 17-years-old going to a private school in her senior year. She aspires to be a nurse. If you don't think our State needs to update its laws on education, perhaps you have not delved into what is happening in our schools lately. That reminds me of the ad for Ford cars, "Have you driven a Ford lately?" Well, Ford is making a better product lately, but education is slipping so fast lately it makes me very upset to have to delve into this subject. Since the summer of 1985 when our Tredyffrin- Easttown Township School District proposed comprehensive 68 Kindergarten through 12th grade sex education to the school board and the school board passed it in four weeks, the concept of having this K-12 sex ed, they just passed it quickly, I knew there was a problem, and what I have uncovered since then grows worse progressively. The school district had me call the head of this project and I talked to him for over an hour. This man had apparently been trained to, quote, "deal," unquote, with any opposition. He finally told me that he would send me an invitation to the meeting exposing their planned curriculum. I never received an invitation. I asked him if I could participate in any parental input sessions. He said that he didn't need or want my input. I called the school district later to inquire about any meetings on this subject, got the date, and attended with my daughter. The audience asked so many penetrating questions that the director of curriculum had to come to the front of the audience to assist and to put the parents in their place for asking questions that he found unanswerable. From this point until the K-12 sex education was voted in by the school board, parents deluged the township with negative input on the K-12 sex ed and the school board paid no heed. Immediately after the vote I spoke to the same man in charge of the program. He said 69 that the school district had to go ahead with it after all the input because if they didn't, quote, "They would be admitting that they were wrong," unquote. Who are these people who are running our schools? Who are these people that we entrust our children to? Who are these people who write these textbooks? How are the textbooks chosen? They're chosen by people who fall for the best presentation, not necessarily the best content. I have asked the very responsible people who have chosen the terrible textbooks. Who has the time to read them cover to cover? But thank God for the responsible parent who takes the time to read them, that is, if they are so lucky to have the books come for them to see, which in most cases they don't. In some cases they don't, anyway.

I know of a mother of an llth-grade girl. They are neighbors. The mother opted the girl out of the 10th grade sex ed section of the required health course. This lovely girl was literally harassed by fellow students for being different by her teacher. When the girl went into the sex ed portion of the last section of the health class, she had an A. The teacher harassed her by giving her a C. She also counted her absent from all those classes after having permission to opt-out. People are intimidated into taking the course 70 and those who opt out are being ridiculed. Parents are afraid of peer pressure for their children. A lot of the parents who don't care grew up in the '60's and the '70's and their permissive generation and think anything goes, or they don't think of these matters at all. You committee people are in charge. We need your help. My children are beyond your help, but I am hoping your hearts soften to protect our future generation. My community, our country, our world, is at stake. We need leaders to stem the tide of an age-old cult. That cult is paganism. A world without God is sad and cruel. In a world whose people put their own in ovens, boiling oil, nailed to wooden crosses, fed to lions, and now are attempting to take God out of our lives and minds, is this a world that we can complacently trust? My daughter said that we need laws to protect the weak and the innocent. You are the lawmakers, please protect us. please pass the parent and pupil Protection Act.

(See index for exhibits of Ms. M. Sullivan.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there questions? Representative Fox.

BY REPRESENTATIVE FOX: (Of Ms. Sullivan) Q. Thank you for your testimony. Let me ask you 71 a question, if I can. Do you have any input as a parent, have you in your school district, with either the course or the books that were used, or pamphlets? A. Well, we tried desperately, and luckily one of the books that they used in 10th grade in a co-ed class for health that had Masters and Johnson studies that I won't even go into what that's all about but where they were explaining to kids what happens step by step in sexual arousement, okay, this was part of — it was really a very, very gross book. They did remove that book.

Q. As a result of parent pressure or complaint? A. Well, yeah, parents — as a matter of fact, do you know what I have found? It's really interesting, but I really don't think the head of curriculum even knew what was in these books. I don't even think the superintendent knew what was in these books. I think only the teacher really knew. And when I went over and I was showing some of these books, they will back them up, but I really could tell by their reaction I don't think they knew what was going on. But the Finding My Way book, which I have furnished some of the pages with my testimony, that is still there, and I understand that they are thinking 72 about removing that one because it really is, I mean they— Q. You think you need this legislation passed in order to avoid having a fight every year over what goes on? A. Well, as you can see what happened, they don't really like to listen to parents. As a matter of fact, they said that they didn't care if the whole township turned out, they were going to pass this K-12 sex education. And we had a lot of really excellent testimony from all kinds of people, ph.D.'s and child psychologists that showed that it's very damaging to teach children about sex because of the latency period. They need this time to — the girls identify themselves as women and the boys, well, we don't want the girls around, we want our club house, and all that. Well, this way, you're forcing children into talking about sex, which they're very uncomfortable with.

We had all this testimony and they went ahead and passed it and as recently as a couple of weeks ago one of the school board members told one of my friends they were sorry that they passed it. Q. But they haven't appealed it? A. No. Q. Thank you. 73 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Mrs. Sullivan, just a couple of other questions.

BY REPRESENTATIVE COWELL: (Of Ms. Sullivan) Q. This all began in 1985/ is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Again, I'm from the other end of the State and I'm a little ignorant about what happens in some of the local districts at this end of the State. It's hard to keep up with 501 districts. The board members who served in 1985, the summer of 1985/ who approved this curriculum, how many of those board members are still on the board? A. Well, let me see. The president, she's become president. Okay, she's still there, I guess all of them except three, around that. I mean, I would have to— Q. What happened to those three? Were they defeated? A. Let me see. Well, some people, their time was up. Q. And they didn't run again? A. And they didn't run again. Let me see. One person was defeated, though. The incumbent. There was 74 one incumbent that was defeated, and he supported our views, and he is in there. Q. you said he was defeated? A. Well, the incumbent was defeated by someone who has our views. Q. Okay. I see. A. And then there's another man there. Q. So there have been two elections and there's been an opportunity for everybody who served on the board in *85 to be unelected, because there have been two elections since that time and we have four members that run one year and five the next. A. Um-hum. Q. I'm not sure what— A. Well, there was a landslide, though, for — it was a very kind of innocuous election, there weren't that many things going on, and a lot of people turned out specifically to vote for this one person, and he did get in and this other man got in. And there are changes that are being made, but the people that— Q. Do you think the process is working then in the district? A. It's a long, hard thing to do. I mean, all that we've been through in the past two years, I mean, it's hard to put down in five minutes, but the same 75 superintendent is still there and the same head of curriculum is still there and they still have the same book, they put in K-12 sex ed, even though 300 parents came out on a blizzard night to protest it. They totally ignored us.

I think what happens is that when the school board people have — well, the superintendent and the head of curriculum have a lot of influence on the school board. They become very close friends. Q. Your daughter, the daughter who is of high school age, is in a private school now? A. Yes. Yes. Q. is there a sex ed program in that private school? A. It's traditional in most schools to have a sex ed course like in about I guess the seventh or eighth grade, and they've already had it and it was sufficient. It's a girls' school. The girls thought that was enough, and they don't have any comprehensive K-12 sex ed. Q. uh-huh. A. And our daughter did go to Conestoga for one semester and I did opt her out. She was the only one that did opt out of that section for sex ed, but in the middle of the year then after that first semester, we removed her from school. 76 Q. I was curious about the private school. I was at the breakfast the other morning put on by the parents' Commission, the advocates for this, and I was talking to a couple of parents from down this way, and I couldn't remember if you were one of them or not, a couple of parents who had an experience in the private schools as well, and they were telling me they thought these principles should apply to the private sector as well as the public schools, and I was trying to recall if you were one of those parents. A. No, I did speak with you but I did not discuss the private school because I'm not having that problem with this school, but I do think that it should cover the private schools because, you know, they're part of the system, too. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Sullivan) Q. I understand the pressures on a young teenager for being opted out. I understand those kind of pressures, however, I'm a bit surprised that we haven't had a greater number of students opting out. I'm thinking to myself like the Students Against Drunk Driving, for example. I think that that's a big, growing movement in our schools. I think it started small and 77 now it's growing. It was the outside thing to do for a while. Now I think Students Against Drunk Driving is the "in" thing to do. I'm wondering why we didn't have more success and more students opting out. If 300 parents in a community are against this, why aren't there 300 kids opting out of the program? Can you help me with that? A. Well, there were a lot of students that did opt out, you know, from the lower grades on up. They did opt out. But parents, they just have such a difficult time, and like the other lady said, that the children are very sad. They want to be a part of the group. See, what we recommended with the sex education was to have people opt in. If you feel that you cannot discuss sex with your children, that you cannot teach them, well, opt in. Select it like you would anything else - driver's training, or whatever. It seems to be a lot more fair to opt-in. And how many people would opt-in? And, you know, they send a packet at the beginning of school every year that that could be handed out there. Q. Has this ever been tried? You know, a lot of people think the only way to solve a problem is to pass a law, you know. I think I've been in Harrisburg long 78 enough to know that you might create a problem by passing a law many times. A. Um-hum. Q. I wonder if there have been any schools that you know of that really convinced the school board and the superintendent that they should opt-in, have a program like that at the local level. Have you ever heard of any student do that?

A. No, i haven't heard of anything, but you know what happens, it seems like they have their mind made up, the superintendent and the head of curriculum have their mind made up, this is what they want to do, they sell the idea to the school board. And then when people come along with new ideas, their minds are closed, they don't want to hear it. They don't want to hear opt-in. Q. You see, the sad part about it, and I think the last speaker talked about that, who are these people that are running our schools? You know, I think that the concept of the school board director has somehow or another gotten all off base. The school board director is the spokesman for the people. A. Exactly. Q. And they are the ones that should be putting and advancing forth the idea or else the people should not elect the school board members. I think that's what 79 Ron was probably alluding to in his questioning. So I'm wondering why that hasn't worked better then. A. it's very difficult. You know, we live in a very transient society now. When you move into an area,

how do you know what these people are all about? You go and you vote. You don't know what their ideas are, their values, or anything.

Q. Well, I'm familiar with, you know, I'm from Chester County. I'm right next door. I live in West Goshen Township, so I know that school district very well, and that's a sophisticated bunch of people over there.

A. You mean T-E? Q. Yeah, T-E and Connestoga. I represented that school district for a while, and I know that you have a sophisticated voter over there, and I know that when we go to the polls as Representatives, you know, they give us some pretty hard questions. Why aren't the communities asking those same hard questions to the school board members? A. Well, we do have two people in right now that are asking a lot of questions. Things are starting to change. It's interesting, but there were two people 80 that got into the school board because there were things going on like closing down two of the schools, and so this one woman got in, she is the president of the school board right now. But over the years they've become very friendly, very close to the superintendent and to the head of curriculum, and so forth. Q. There is no excuse for that because they are not paid by the school district, they're paid by the taxpayers, and they are voted in and they are voted out. Not paid, no pay. No pay for the school district. Sorry about that. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: What about a per diem? REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: There's not even a per diem. MS. M. SULLIVAN: But you see, we are the outside. If you go to any meeting, the teachers are over here, they have the head of the union here, and it's you parents and it's us school board, we are the school, and we are fighting for our lives and for our children, and that's why we need this bill, to protect us and our children. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, thank you very much 81 for being here. I understand the next witness is your daughter. And we didn't have her first name. MS. M. SULLIVAN: Jennifer. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Jennifer Sullivan is our next witness. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Hi. I'm Jennifer Sullivan and I'm a college student, and I'm here to express my support for this bill. Education must be monitored by parental input. The reason for this need of checks and balances provided by the Parent and Pupil protection Act is seen in the following. Firstly, parents of students often disagree with educators on ethical, political, and educational matters. The second reason being that schools are overstepping their boundaries in the education of our youth. The conflict in philosophy between parents and educators can be seen in the national platform of the NEA. The NEA has endorsed Governor Dukakis in this Presidential campaign and therefore espoused his considerably radical ideals. On these moral issues Dukakis, and therefore the NEA, stands: a) Dukakis proposed a bill legalizing abortion in the State of Massachusetts before the passing 82 of Roe v. Wade.

b) He was one of the country's earliest gay rights' activists, and c) He passed a controversial bill legalizing bestiality.

d) He appeared as the.keynote—

REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Point of order, Mr.

Chairman.

Is this germane to the bill?

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Well, I try to—

REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Even though I agree with her as far as the bill is concerned.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: I try not to stifle witnesses, but I would ask you to speak to the bill rather than the elections.

MS. J. SULLIVAN: Okay. Well, the reason why

I'm referring to this is because I'm saying that the

National Education Association pretty much has a platform that imposes its moral ideas, these are moral issues not merely political issues—

REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: As a Democrat, Mr.

Chairman— REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, I think you should let her speak on whatever it is that she want's to say. 83 MS. J. SULLIVAN: Thank you. And my last point is that he appeared as the keynote speaker at the annual planned Parenthood dinner in Washington, thereby expressing his alignment with their philosophy. The majority of this country who elected the conservative platform of the Reagan administration on such issues as abortion and other moral issues would not be happy if they knew, as I know from being in the public schools, how directly the platform of the NEA affects teachers and their biases in classroom discussions.

It has been established that many parents and educators disagree on matters of moral and political significance, therefore children are often learning that which is in disagreement with the values of their parents. Next to be examined are the ways in which the schools have overstepped their boundaries and their participation in the moral development of students. It is here that the justification for this bill can be seen. The greatest infringement on the part of the NEA, therefore the teachers, on the role of parents in the education of their children is in sex education. Questions which delve into the personal lives of students and their family are demeaning, nosey, and unrelated to 84 the purpose of academic study. The following survey on stress was given to the T-E High School to complete in class. The following which did cause stress were to be checked: Issues such as a fear of dying or that a parent has boyfriends or girlfriends around that the student doesn't like; conditions at home which are physically not good - too dirty, messy, or poor; I am more or less active in church lately.

These questions are undoubtedly intrusive. Another activity which was offensive was done in a high school Humanities class in my high school where students were told to write down whether they had sex or not. A girl I know was infuriated at the question but responded. The results were discussed and the outcome was that they thought that she had answered yes, even though she had answered no.

Schools also undermine the authority of parents by asserting their own values in moral areas of sex education. issues like premarital sex, contraception, abortion, homosexuality ferment discussion which stresses that there is no right answer, whatever is right for you is the best conclusion. The decision to have sex before marriage is considered as equally responsible as abstinence in an age of rampant venereal disease, AIDS, and certain risk of cervical cancer for 85 promiscuous young girls. I consider this a highly irresponsible educational position. For the sake of protecting the children from serious physical and mental harm, we spend millions on the "just Say No" to drugs campaign, with a similar position on alcohol and smoking. Educators should take the same position with regard to the physical and psychological risks of permissive sexual behavior among the youth. But will they have the courage to condemn this because of the tremendous profits being reaped by promiscuity? Planned Parenthood, who has supplied the educational materials for our district, is a strong promoter of sex education K-12. They encourage sexual permissiveness by promoting contraceptives and abortion, and the idea of sex as the new American recreation, forgetting the serious side effects. The area of homosexuality and bestiality in sex education materials, an example being Chapter 13, Finding My Way, the book used in the Conestoga School District, are considered alternate or variations in lifestyle. You must provide -us with this bill so that parents and students can be assured of the protection of their children and their values. Thank you. 86

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Jennifer, thank you for

your comments. Do we have questions? Representative Kosinski.

REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: It's not so much a question as a comment. I object to you putting partisan politics into this. I'm a conservative Democrat and my name is on the top of that bill, and there are a number of other Democrats. It is not an issue of Democrat versus Republican. Governor Dukakis does not pick up the phone and tell Democrats in Pennsylvania to vote against it. Neither does George Bush pick up a phone and tell us what to do. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Um-hum. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: There is an agenda in the Democratic Party that I have been fighting against for years. It's a wave of mainstream. But to make this a partisan issue is absolutely wrong because we have a number of democrats up there who are on the bill who agree with what you say but do not want to make it a partisan issue.

MS. J. SULLIVAN: Okay. Well— REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: It's an issue mainly of what is right, what is moral, and of parents' choice in this matter. 87 MS. J. SULLIVAN: I understand that, but I personally object to, as I said, the National Education Association supporting particularly a candidate who is so radical in these particular issues that I mentioned because— REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: What does the NEA have to do with any of this here? Nobody takes marching orders here from the NEA.

MS. J. SULLIVAN: Well, I know that there is pressure on the part of teachers to belong to the organization, is that not true? REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Not here. I mean, we're legislators. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Okay. Well, the fact is that we're discussing education and I'm saying that these ideas from teachers, which most teachers are Democrats. I mean, most of the teachers that I have had— REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Oh, give me a break there. Give me a break. You cannot make these comments without having some data. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Her perception. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Perception is different. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Yes. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Okay. Maybe from my 88 limited view that is true, but I can— REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Perception is different than actual fact. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Well, then why is it that so many teachers belong to this association which traditionally supported Democratic candidates? REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Why do so many attorneys belong to the American Bar Association? it's a national organization.

MS. J. SULLIVAN: Do they support a particular candidate? REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: ABA? MS. J. SULLIVAN: Yeah. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: I would imagine if the — for example, the ABA does not have a PAC as such, but the trial lawyers have PACs, and the NEA doesn't support candidates but the PACs support them. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Yes. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Okay? MS. J. SULLIVAN: Um-hum. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: But I'm sure that the NEA has backed such great people, or at least their counterparts in Pennsylvania, as Dick Thornburgh. The PSEA has. CHAIRMAN COWELL: This young lady's college 89 is going to object to her getting free political Science 101.

REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: What college do you go to anyway? MS. J. SULLIVAN: Moore College of Art. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Oh, okay. MS. J. SULLIVAN: We do have academic classes, despite what you may think. REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: IS that a liberal arts school? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: No. Just your perceptions are much different than reality, and that's what I'm trying to point out here. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Well, that's your point of view, actually. It is. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Get educated on the issues. Talk to some real Democrats. MS. J. SULLIVAN: I'll talk to you afterwards. You obviously are. REPRESENTATIVE LINTON: You're from the permissive age of parents of the '60's and '70*s. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And now from another real Democrat, Representative Fattah. REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: Thank you very much. 90 BY REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: (Of Ms. J. Sullivan) Q. Let me ask you a question. Obviously from your testimony and the testimony of the previous witness, it's obvious that your parents have been extremely concerned about your education and your upbringing. However, I'm sure that now that you're in college you've met a lot of students— A. Right. Q. —who may not have had parents who have been so concerned or so involved. A. Um-hum. Q. And perhaps you could help the committee understand how it is that we should make sure that these young people have the answers to very important questions in their lives when they may or may not have parents at home who are as concerned. A. Um-hum. Q. Could you help the committee in some way understand how we find a middle ground here? A. Okay. I have met a lot of different people from different backgrounds, especially going to an art college, and an all-women's art college. You meet people from different backgrounds as far as preference, you know, even sexually, let's just say. But the fact is that the thing that I'm a little bit worried about is 91 that the schools seem to press the issues of abortions. They say, well, we don't want to discuss it in a moral way, but then when they bring up the discussion they lead the discussion in terms of, you know, what are your options.

And then, you know, like in the classroom where they're teaching the sex education, they had a pro- choice poster up and a phone number to call, and I didn't see any of the, you know, pro-life material. I mean, that material is significant material. I mean, why isn't that — the person who founded the National Abortion Rights Action League is now a pro-lifer and he has some significant material which I think should be presented in the classrooms. I mean, if they're going to be presenting Planned parenthood material, they ought to be presenting the other side of the issue. Q. So you think that there should be sex education but it should be balanced? A. Well, I would rather if sex education stuck more to the biological aspects because I find too many teachers are too interested in gearing towards moral discussions and what they think because they think they have to tell the children how to speak. They say, well, the parents aren't around to tell them. They assume too much, you know. They assume the responsibility of . 92 teaching the kids issues that I think should be discussed at home or just kept on a biological level. I mean, we're there to learn academics and things like that and not, you know, moral issues. Q. Okay. In part of your testimony you spoke about the problem of schools today teaching children away from the values of parents. A. Urn-hum. Q. In the past in this country there have been generations of parents who have had opinions and values that now are very much to disdain the general society. For instance, racial prejudice, anti-semantic opinions. And our school systems have been used in a variety of ways to counterbalance opinions of previous generations. A. um-hum. Q. So how do you reconcile that conceptually with your viewpoint now about values? And obviously in some people's homes they are transmitting values to their children that you might find distasteful. A. um-hum. Q. And shouldn't we use our school system in some way to try to formulate it in a more unified society and one that's a little more tolerant? A. Okay. Well, I think that discussion is good. I mean, we have a lot of discussion about these things in 93 every area, in Humanities and so forth in high school. But I think that when discussion is held where there's only one point of view put across, the children aren't informed enough to get involved in discussions like abortion and so forth. They put forth, you know, these opinions. The kids haven't researched. I spent a month researching it for a paper, and all they're given is that it's an option. Do you know what I mean? There's discussion, but the children aren't informed enough on both sides of the issue to get involved in these more intricate moral questions of incest and bestiality and everything.

And not only that but just the fact that the school presents them, issues like homosexuality and bestiality, as a variation, you know, just another way to live, is a moral position in itself. I mean, that is making a stand that it is equal to all other forms of living, whatever. And a lot of people would disagree with that, you know. REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Jennifer, we had another young lady testify at our hearing in Harrisburg last Friday. She was a high school student, and I said to 94 her, she took a position contrary to yours on the bill, but I said to her and I repeat to you that we especially appreciate your testimony. We, as an Education Committee, hear too infrequently from students, and you're what this stuff is all about. So I appreciate you taking the time and presenting very articulate testimony and responses to questions. Thank you. MS. J. SULLIVAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Norma Rolnick, Dr. Norma Rolnick, from Philadelphia. DR. ROLNICK: I would like to add some illustrations that I don't have in my printed remarks, with your permission. I was a psychologist for Family Service of Philadelphia for 23 years and a consultant for the Intermediate Unit of Montgomery County for 8 years. I am a certified school psychologist in the State of Pennsylvania, as well as a licensed clinical psychologist. My brief remarks concern Section 2506-A, which is the so-called Protection of Pupil Rights section. School psychologists are called upon to evaluate children who are exhibiting behavior or learning problems. How can one discuss the reason for referral with a child without treading on a potentially 95 embarrassing area for the child or parent? And this bill in part of the things that the psychologist is not supposed to question children on is anything that might be potentially embarrassing for the child or parent. Children are not referred for evaluations because they are, for example, being considered for a special medal or something of that sort. So that any kind of referral is going to involve something that's a potentially embarrassing area for the child or parent. Even if the child has difficulty in mathematics, that is potentially embarrassing for the child or parent. There is nothing that a child is referred to that is not in that area.

By creating this long laundry list of areas which the psychologist must prevent a child from mentioning, the bill creates distortions of the evaluation procedure, instead of being able to be attentive to whatever a child or adolescent presents as his or her concern, the psychologist will have to become defensive in avoiding such conversations. I believe that these rules will cause caring and skilled psychologists to avoid our schools as places of employment. What I would like to add is that if you considered simply a learning problem, what a skilled psychologist does is consider what the child's potential might be and what could be done to bring out that 96 potential. There is no way to separate a child's emotional functioning from his intellectual functioning in reaching those answers. And if one does not create a situation in which anything that a child says is worthy of paying attention to, then you are not going to be creating a situation in which the answers can be derived to those questions of what is this child's potential and what could be done about it. You would be resorting then to using a psychologist or anyone else as if you were giving a paper and pencil test rather than using the psychologist's skill.

I don't understand why the psychiatrist is included in that section at all, why he or she is even mentioned, from that specialty, since special education is supposed to be exempted from that because in my understanding, the psychiatrists that are employed by the school district are employed when they evaluate children who are going to be considered for special education classes, or perhaps in some situations where the child has been absent from school or created major problems in the school and there is consideration of exclusion of the child. Perhaps I am mistaken in that, but in my years of experience I didn't know of any other situations in which psychiatrists were employed or paid by school districts. So that I feel that this is a particular — 97 in reality, this is going to hamper the psychologists and their functioning more than any other group. However, if these rules were accepted as worthy, that this is not something that a child should not be allowed, even in confidence, to mention any of these areas that have been listed in the bill, I don't understand why it is all right for the school disciplinarian or the school social worker to be able to listen to the child. If it's wrong, why isn't it wrong for everybody? Why are the psychologists singled out for this? I would just like to conclude that if these rules were adopted, that those psychologists who do want to do a skilled job will find employment elsewhere. I don't think it would lend itself to a position that would encourage people who are of the highest quality to take such positions. There are other sections of this bill that I do not favor, but I felt that I would want to limit my remarks and to be open to questions in this area that I have spent a lifetime of my professional life in working at and that I have a great deal, I think, of my own special experience to offer. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much, ma'am. Are there questions? I note that we've been joined by 98 Representative Dwight Evans from Philadelphia. Dr. Rolnick, let me ask you a couple questions.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Rolnick)

Q. You've testified specifically about Section 2506-A. You've had a chance to read that entire section, correct? A. Yes. Q. In your business, and I'm referring to language in the bill now, speaks to psychiatric and psychological examination, testing, or treatment. in your business, might a psychological exam or test or treatment take an oral or verbal form in contrast to a written exam? A. Well, everything that a child says is part of the evaluation. Everything that a child reacts to — what is important is to notice a child's feelings about what's happening. If they're doing arithmetic problems, how do they respond to that? So it is— Q. So that's pretty broad language then? A. Yes. But what we have to distinguish what goes into an evaluation from what goes into a report. I have seen thousands of school psychologists' reports and what one understands is that a report in the school file may be seen by teachers, although they're kept 99 confidential, but they're meant to be seen by teachers and by school social workers, and so a school psychologist must be tactful and cognizant of protecting the privacy of a parent and child except as what the recommendation is. At the end their recommendation might be that the child have this particular kind of health or that particular kind of health and what went into that however was that the psychologist has the responsibility to be aware of whatever the child is communicating in whatever area. He can't close his or her ears to say, I can't have you talk to me about the income of a family or the fact that your mother and father are divorced and you don't see your father. Those things are potentially embarrassing but he can't close his or her ears to that because this is what's relevant to why that child is having a behavior problem or a learning problem.

Q. We have a law in Pennsylvania that requires school personnel to report suspected cases of child abuse. Now, obviously, we expect that before a report is filed that folks will make some reasonable determination. There may be that there is good reason to suspect that child abuse is occurring. As you have read Section 2506-A, I know that doesn't keep anybody from making a report, but the issue was raised last week that in fact that language and the 100 prohibitions in that section may in fact keep a school psychologist or psychiatrist or other school personnel from making a reasonable, informed determination about whether child abuse might be occurring. A. Yes. I think that's true. Q. Do you interpret that language to be a problem in that regard? A. Yes, I do. I think that the language squelches the kind of rapport that would exist between a child and a psychologist or any other person in the school because I think if you have one group of professionals operating within these rules I really do feel that it spreads to the other groups because they can feel, well, if this group of professionals is under attack now we'll be next, so we're going to act safe. And this acting safe is something that is already happening in the schools all the time. I can tell you that I believe, and I've worked in the schools, I believe that the atmosphere of being concerned about the minorities and how they feel about it, even if the majority is in support of you, school people take the tendency of being safe. They don't want to be under attack, they don't want to be in a lawsuit, they don't want to be criticized, and it becomes the lowest common denominator very quickly. And so that I really do 101 believe that if the psychologists are prevented from having this rapport that you will soon have the school disciplinarian, the school principal, the school social workers having the same constraints. Q. If, as a school nurse, or in your case specifically a school psychologist, you had some reason to believe that a child might be the victim of sexual abuse at home or anywhere else, but a victim of sexual abuse, would you be able to pursue that concern and make a more informed determination through examination and testing, whatever other rules you employ as a professional, without eliciting information concerning sexual behavior and attitudes?

A. If I — I think you'd have to distinguish whether this test took place under a specific referral to evaluate that question, which would probably only take place after there had been a complaint and probably would not be being done by the school psychologist in the first place. I think probably the evaluation would be taken place under other auspices. But if this came up because of something that the child said, without any suspicion prior to that, if I were a school psychologist operating under the constraints of this law, I would be asking myself, how can I say that the child said this because I'm now going 102 to be attacked for saying, well, didn't you bring the

question up? Didn't you ask the question? Unless we're going to have somebody taking a tape recording of everything that's happening, I would be faced then with this question. And I think that the psychologists who don't want to operate with such unprofessional rules will not work for the school system. Those that you will have left will be people who can't get other jobs and who will be willing to operate safely but not doing a job that is

for the protection of the child or for the child's best interests. Did I answer your question? Q. Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Dr. Rolnick) Q. Dr. Rolnick, are you projecting that you perceive that people in your profession will not want to work in the schools under this law, or do you have some kind of evidence that would support that stand? A. Well, I'm not talking — I'm talking now just about this section. Q. I know, but several times you have referred to the fact that, well, all we'll have left are the dregs 103 of my profession. They won't want to do a good job. They'll go seek jobs other places. I want to know if that is your perception or do you have some facts to base up that position? A. Well, I do know that representatives of the school psychologists will be testifying against this bill. i have been in communication with them. I also know that the Pennsylvania Psychological Association will be testifying against the bill. The Pennsylvania Psychological Association's newsletter, which I receive, came out against the bill, and so I am not referring only to my own opinions but to opinions that are shared by the body's two professional groups.

Q. I think we all in our professional life have a tendency to want to protect our own turf and, you know, if you see that as threatening to your profession, then I can understand that viewpoint. I happen to be a health teacher and so, you know, maybe I should be trying to protect, you know, the turf of that group too. But let me go on— A. Could I respond to what you just said? Q. Yes. A. I do believe I'm protecting the turf of the psycholog ists— Q. Sure. 104 A. —and I don't apologize for it. But I believe what I'm protecting is the kernel, the heart, of the role of the service to the child and the parents, not some kind of "Now I get paid more" or the turf in the sense that "I'll get a bigger office" or something of that sort. I'm stepping up here and volunteering to volunteer and I'm doing this because of the investment of my lifetime in the service of children with learning disabilities. This has been an area that I have specialized in. I'm no longer active in this. it's not my personal turf anymore, but it's because I feel for these children who have these problems and for the role of the psychologists in helping them that I'm making these comments.

Q. I do understand that, just as it isn't going to help the young girl who just talked. She's talking for the future. So I understand that. Now, let me get to the heart of that. Have you, or any of your colleagues, ever seen the materials that have been used in the classroom that people are referencing this morning? Like you must have talked to people that have had thousands of interviews with students. Did any of them come and show you what's been going on in the classroom? A. With due respect, I have seen some of those, 105 but I did not prepare my entire testimony in relation to the entire bill. I'm going to leave that to other people. I felt that this particular area was something that I have a great deal of personal experiences and wanted to limit my remarks on the rest.

Q. I understand that, Doctor, but I think the two are related because you're saying that here's a group of people who can really help the youngster, you know, get to the core of the problem and so what I'm asking you is that from the people that have been reviewing the problems that are going on, you know, what positive action did you take or your group take against materials that were being distributed that maybe in your professional opinion would not have been correct?

A. Well, I have expressed my personal opinion to a reporter that asked me this that I felt that the materials prepared by the State — I'm afraid I don't remember the exact person who was in charge of that, but I had seen some materials that as a matter of fact I got from Representative Freind's office, and I did not approve of them. I thought they were in poor taste and I was very pleased to know that no school district, in my understanding, had ever used them, And what I feel is, my own personal opinion, is that there is a great deal of common sense in the 106 school districts and there is this democratic process that goes on where the parents express their opinions and they are listened to. I know I've heard parents here today I'm very interested to say that they don't feel that they're listened to. I worked also in Pottstown, as one of the areas in which I was a consultant, and I can tell you that the way I felt, in working in the school system, that we were all very concerned about every parent's opinion, and seeing it from the other side I would say that I felt that — and rightly so. I'm not saying we shouldn't have been concerned, but I just was very interested to hear parents say that from the other point of view when I was aware of how much respect is given to the views of parents, which I believe should be. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Doctor, thank you very much for your testimony. Our next witness is Kathy Bond, from West Chester. MS. BOND: I come before you this morning as a parent and educator who has been actively involved in the community promoting parental involvement in sex education. Before moving to Pennsylvania in 1986, I 107 helped found, with other members of the community, a Problem Pregnancy Center north of the city of Pontiac, Michigan, pontiac at the time in 1985 had reportedly the highest rate of teenage pregnancy, 15 to 19 years of age, in the United States for its size city. Because of our center's commitment to helping pregnant teens, we were invited to participate in Choice or Chance, a community awareness program established to help eliminate teenage pregnancy. It is noteworthy that this effort was sponsored by the Michigan Department of Social Services and Planned parenthood.

The Pontiac School District had been teaching sex education in the schools for the past 18 years. Despite this long-term effort, the cry was that the students needed closer monitoring and a more active involvement of the community by introducing school-based clinics. Does this format sound familiar? it should, because it's been instigated in school districts, especially those with a high black or Hispanic population, throughout Pennsylvania as well as the United States. The most recent of these efforts is in the Pittsburgh School District in the name of The New Futures Initiative, helped by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. What has been known as the school-based clinic has now 108 become the neighborhood wellness clinic. In pontiac, the parents rose up in righteous indignation against the school-based clinics, and rightfully so. Because once their signature permitting their child's use of the clinics was obtained, they forfeited their rights to any knowledge of their child's activity within the clinic. parental permission and values were no longer sought.

It has been my experience in the pregnancy center and otherwise that most of those teens who became pregnant or who were concerned about becoming pregnant were from homes unable to give the love and attention which promote good communication and therefore an expression of values and desires for their children. Even problem parents want the very best for their children and would hope to instill in their children the highest of values.

In a recent story in parade Magazine, "How Adults Could Have Helped Me," a mother who became pregnant at age 15 states: "Sex-ed didn't instill morals or give you enough reasons not to get pregnant."..."They talked about the pill and stuff like that."..."My teachers tried to teach all the right things. But there should have been more talk about love, commitment and values. I guess they figured we learned all that from our parents." Michelle offers this advice to parents, 109 "Parents usually have been through everything you're going through and can offer proper guidance." She continues, "It's never too late to acquaint your kids with how things are. Talk to them and instill your values and morals and expectations. At the same time, listen to what they have to say." That is the testimony of an unwed, now 17-year-old, mother who has experienced all of what bad sex education and lack of parental involvement can do.

In a review of the literature on sex education, it was determined that, "by the 1970s, ... the primary goal of sex instruction was the prevention of pregnancy and not the control of sexual relations....At the same time evidence also emerged that parents, teachers and students did not agree on whether or not sex education should stress the negative consequences of premarital relations. in a survey conducted by Dearth, 69 percent of the respondents who were parents said sex education should stress the negative consequences, while 74 percent of the teachers and 58 percent of the students said it should not." This again underlines the importance of the need for parental involvement in establishing values in sex education programs. While most teachers want the best for their students, their values are not necessarily in harmony with those of the 110 parents.

I'm sure we in this room are all aware of the latest Harris poll which points out that 51 percent of the parents polled would send their children to private schools; 55 percent say private schools are better. Why? Is it not values? Whether it is a better education, better discipline or better morality, parents would like to determine the values for their children. Every five years in the Chicago schools principals, teachers and parents together adopt the curriculum and textbooks for the next five years.

In the fall 1987 issue of the American Educator, the publication of the American Federation of Teachers, in an article entitled "The Values Vacuum," the complete article is included with the testimony for you, author Harriet Tyson-Bernstein states, "Complaints about the %value-neutral' curriculum have been mounting amid a growing sense that the schools are leaving students morally adrift. in search of a stronger moral compass for their children, a small but steady stream of parents have transferred their children to parochial schools. Public opinion polls repeatedly show that parents want 'values' taught in the schools. Across the nation, States and school districts have appointed commissions to develop ways to convey moral and ethical values to Ill children."

Mr. Chairman and honorable Representatives, I implore you to support the adoption of the parent and Pupil Protection Act. in order that our Commonwealth, the keystone State of our nation, survive and progress, we must honor and respect its most fundamental unit, the family and its values. Thank you. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Bond.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there questions? Representative Taylor. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: I'd just like to make a statement. I thank you for the testimony. I think it was well researched and well presented and Mr. Chairman, I want you to know that Mrs. Bond works in this area. A great deal of time is devoted to this, so I thank you for being here this morning, Kathy. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Bond)

Q. Let me ask you if you would elaborate just a little bit on the school district and the parents project in Chicago of working out a program every five years. Has it worked? A. Yes. I don't have the details on it, but I did call the American Federation of Teachers and they said, yes, it was working, and every five years they 112 update the material. Q. And do you know how that — what is the makeup of that committee? Does it change or how does it— A. That I don't know. I have called and am hoping to get information on it, but I haven't gotten any further details on that. Q. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, maybe if you do get that, Kathy, would you be willing to share that with the committee? A. Certainly. Q. I think it's important for us to see where programs of this type have experienced success. I think that would be very important. Do you think that the bill as it stands now is strong in support of teaching of the values that you would like to see taught in schools or do you think it could be strengthened? If so, how? It might be a tough one. A. I guess I didn't look for, you know, any more advancement. I think it's the best we can have at this time. Because the parental involvement, I think, will bring to the rest of the community the urgency of the problem and also raise up those parents who are not involved or are not caring. I think that the input of 113 the parents and their involvement will raise those children and those families up. Q. Do you think that when teachers see this kind of support from the parents it will help them in their quest to teach the values in the classroom? A. I think so, and I think that's in evidence in West Chester. I've only lived there two years. Eighteen years ago they put in a sex education program and the parents stood up and fought and the school implemented the wishes of those parents and sex education is not started until sixth grade. Also, when the AIDS program was mandated, I felt that the school district did very much to involve the parents. They sent out the curriculum. It was available through the PTA and to any parent who wanted to come and read the curriculum. So I think that certainly the school district, the teachers and the administrators are very willing to sit down and work in that area. Q. If my memory serves me, you might thank the members of this committee because we did review that AIDS policy regulation very carefully and we were able to put in some language that would support that position. Thank you very much. A. Thank you all.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? 114 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Kathy, let me ask you a couple questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Bond) Q. The program in Chicago about which you speak favorably, was that required by the Illinois legislature? A. I'm sorry, I can't speak to that. I have just recently learned about it and I'm still trying to find more about it and when I do, I will give that information to the committee. Q. To the best of my knowledge, that is a program that was developed at the local level by the local school board. A. It may well be. Q. You speak critically — I interpret your remarks to be critical of the new program in Pittsburgh. A. Yes. Q. Have you spoken with any parents in the Pittsburgh School District? A. Yes, I have. I'm a native pittsburgher, so I have friends and relatives back there, so, yes. Q. Can you be more specific about that program and what the problem with it is? You compare it to the kind of jump from the pontiac School District program to Pittsburgh. 115 A. Well, because I see a progression. Q. Uh-huh.

A. The one in Pontiac was just school-based clinics. The one in Pittsburgh is a much more

comprehensive program. it involves putting families on computers, it involves a whole bureaucracy of aides in social services, in the counseling, and I think it's very intrusive and evasive into the family. Q. I continue to live in the Pittsburgh District or live in the Pittsburgh area and represent a portion of the Pittsburgh District, and I've got to report to you that, and I think it's true for other legislators who live in Pittsburgh, we have heard no such complaints from parents who live in that district about the program that was a subject of a lot of public discussion because there were other proposals originally suggested by the school district, and this was the outcome of a lot of public discussion, public hearings. A. Well, not to interrupt you but I'm champing at the bit to say this. I did speak to parents and they were not permitted. There seems to be a way of extricating those people who they don't want to participate in the hearings before the board, the school district, and I did speak to parents whose children were not in school right now but will be coming into the 116 school system and they would not allow them to appear before the school district for the hearings. Q. Uh-huh. Those parents, as I said, have not commented to any legislators though about their displeasure. A. Well, I'll certainly get the message back to them. Q. The other point, the other question, do you currently have children of school age? A. I have one — I have five children. Q. Uh-huh. A. Three are in college and one is graduating. One is now a junior in high school and he is in a private school, although he started out in a public school. He had both agendas. Q. I sense that much of your testimony reflects a broad experience that you've had in this State and elsewhere. You do not speak to specific problems that you and your family and your children have incurred in school districts in Pennsylvania. A. Well, that's because my children were raised before I moved back to Pennsylvania. Q. Uh-huh. A. They generally were — most of them were raised in Michigan, and the Michigan school district we 117 were in there was no sex education, except for fourth and fifth grade when they showed a movie on puberty, which all parents were invited to review. Q. Did you say your youngest child is of high school age? A. Yes. Q. In which school district? A. In West Chester. But he is in a private school.

Q. So you have not had a problem with the West Chester School District? A. No. As I said before, I think the West Chester District has been very considerate of the family. Mr. Figian, who has moved on but was in charge of the curriculum, was very attentive to the parents being involved. Q. So in the one district in Pennsylvania where you've had some personal experience, at least as a resident and a taxpayer, you've had a positive experience with that local school district? A. Yes, but that's not to say that it could change in, you know, in another day or another year. Q. Okay. Thank you very much. A. You're welcome. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Mr. Chairman? 118 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Yes? I'm sorry, Representative Evans.

BY REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Q. I'm just curious in following up on the Chicago plan again that you mentioned. Is there any feedback you can give us as a result of the values being taught, the direct effect that it has had upon the children? A. As I've said earlier, I have just learned of the experience in Chicago and I have not gotten the details yet. I've just in recent weeks it's been, and so I haven't gotten any feedback except that they do this every five years. I'm not even sure at this point at what year it was put into place. Q. So there's no material that you know of that we can look at? A. No, but I will send it to the committee when I get it. Q. I guess I'm just curious, I'm certainly an advocate for young people, particularly a certain tone set and certain understanding, but there also has to be some way, in my view, to measure that in terms of results. I was just curious, if this is being done in Chicago, has it affected the question of teen pregnancy, teen suicide, and other kinds of things that do occur? 119 Because I think that's the bottom line, we ought to be able to measure and take some type of action. On the other hand, has it affected human behavior? Because that's the kind of concern I would be interested in. So I would generally be in the direction of some type of values, but again, I want to see it effective in whatever outcome it has. A. You realize that the project in Chicago is for all curriculum and textbooks. Q. Correct. Yeah, I realize that. A. Okay. Q. So that's why I'm more interested in you kind of put the program out there but the one piece that is missing is some sort of measuring stick. I think that we have a lot of programs and the tendency is not to have a measuring stick to see if we achieve the results that we have set out to achieve. That's what I'm interested in. A. Yes. As I say, when I get any information on it I will pass it on to the committee. Q. Okay. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Lescovitz. REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: Just a couple questions, Mrs. Bond. 120 BY REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: (Of Ms. Bond) Q. Do you belong to this United Parents organization? A. Yes, I am a member of that. Q. Okay. I want to make sure where your group is coming from so I can read down through the testimony here. is it your group's opinion that parents should be involved in all education curriculum, that they should be helping the students and so on? A. Well, now, let me clarify that because I know your question brought it up. That is my personal feeling. United Parents— Q. No, I'm leading in a different direction. A. All right. Q. I just want to make sure, you feel parents should be involved in education in general because there are a lot of, you know— Q. Yes. A. —the teacher only has the student for 45 minutes out of the day and, you know, he has to have some follow-up at home or she has to have some follow-up at home or that student is not going to be progressing as far as someone who I believe has the help at home to push them in their studies, and so forth. So it's your opinion that parents should be involved in education and 121 helping the young students, is that right? A. Yes. Q. And that you should be involved in picking the curriculum, at least in this education? A. At least have a look at it and perhaps some input as to feelings, yes. Q. Okay. My question comes, though, from the point, say — and it's actually in reverse. Say we had a lot of these '60's and '70's generation, permissive generation, who wanted certain things and certain textbooks used to espouse their feelings. Would you go along with that? That if 90 percent of the West Chester parents were in that generation, they like all that stuff and all those books, would it be your opinion then that that's okay? A. It would not be my opinion that it's okay, but it would be my opinion that if that's what those parents want, that's what they're going to get, and I would opt my child out of it. Q. Okay. But it's just your opinion that the parents should be involved and if it was reversed and they wanted all that stuff, that that's the way it should be? A. And let me rephrase that. I would not opt them out of it. I would opt them before — I would not 122 let them get into it. I would opt them out before they ever got into it. Q. All I'm saying is you feel the parents should be involved in education? A. Yes. Q. And it doesn't make any difference which way they want to be? If they want to be the permissive type, that's okay, just as long as they're involved? A. That's right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Kathy, just one other question which I forgot to ask. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Bond) Q. You indicated that your youngest child is not in a public school. A. Right. Q. I've asked this of several other people and I'm getting a pretty uniform answer. We're dealing with pretty fundamental principles here in terms of parents' rights and information and that sort of thing. Do you believe that whatever principles we establish for the public schools should be applied to the nonpublic schools

as well, the situation that your child currently is in? A. No, I don't think so. Q. Why would that be different? A. Because I think there are a lot of — there's 123 an interplay there between the State and the school and religious views. And because of the organization of the — I guess I really haven't looked at that to analyze it, and perhaps I shouldn't even speak to it at this point. That's a knee-jerk reaction at this point.

Q. I'm curious because when I attended the Parents' Commission breakfast the other morning I spoke to a parent of a child who is in a Catholic school, spoke to a parent of a child who's in a nonreligious private school, both of whom indicated that they had similar unsatisfactory experiences.

A. That's true, you can have unsatisfactory— Q. And the question was, why should we not protect those children and those parents, just as we protect maybe those same children or parents at another time when they were involved in a public school or other parents who enroll their children in public schools. I don't see the difference. A. Well, you may be right. it may be something that would be done. I guess I just have to look a little deeper into the consequences of that private schools and the State from I guess a legal aspect. Q. Uh-huh. Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Margaret Layden, from Berwyn, PA. 124 Go ahead. MS. LAYDEN: Yes, good morning. And a special thank you to each and every one of you for being here. A sex education policy was read from the superintendent's report to Tredyffrin-Easttown Board of School Directors at the regular monthly meeting on May 28, 1985. The policy recommended comprehensive and sequential sex education for grades kindergarten through high school. I draw your attention to the attached yellow sheet, a copy of this board meeting agenda. Reservations were expressed relative to providing parents an opportunity to review a program prior to a child's inclusion in such program, and this has been included as part of a proposed policy statement. Parents had also expressed a desire to assist, where possible, in reviewing and/or developing the program. This, too, will be considered in the curriculum development phase planned for 1985-86 should the policy be adopted. I indicated at that meeting that I was a parent who wished to participate in the review and development of this program. Board members approved the superintendent's recommended action unanimously. On October 4, 1985/ I received an invitation / 125 from the Health Education Coordinator to attend the first Sex Education Citizens Awareness meeting for the purpose of gathering community input. instead, sex consultants greeted us with a group activity. They suggested we divide into small groups to discuss how we had learned sex information as children ourselves. A recorder was assigned in each group to report on the group's discussion and next we discussed in small groups how we thought our children today were learning about sexuality.

A second Citizens Awareness meeting was held on May 8, 1986, when parents shared their concerns about stressing healthy values and ideas on content and age- appropriateness, still no materials or lesson plans available to see. In November, the Family Life Education curriculum guides finally appeared complete for the school board members to review. Parents and community were not allowed access until January of 1987, when copies were placed in the school libraries for review at the library. Having been completely excluded from the developmental phase, I hastened to collect and investigate what materials could be found before implementation, set for February. Some of the materials found through a three- county library search surprised many. One, The Body 126 Book, by Clair Rainer, was planned for first grade activity. Although the book was out of print at that time, a call to the publisher revealed that it would go into another printing for distribution to schools exclusively. Kindly see the attached page, lesson plan on page 112, and it reads, "The Body Book, read and discuss." In this book, the following page gives you one such lesson. "How it happens when a man and a woman want to make a baby. The man's penis stops being floppy and hanging down. it stands to attention, then he can put it gently inside the woman's babymaking hole." This is for six-year-olds.

Did they see this book? Did the teachers on the curriculum committee select this book? The Body Book was subsequently removed from the current first grade curriculum, however, The Body Book is listed as a book to share in a resource workbook entitled "Straight Talk: Sexuality and Education for Parents and Kids Ages 4 through 7," written for the planned Parenthood of West Chester, Incorporated. Kindly look now to the kindergarten lesson plan, page 17, which follows. it's noted as a resource. Another book to read, discuss and share at the kindergarten level is Did The Sun Shine Before You Were Born? I think you've been confronted with that in 127 Harrisburg. Following the text of this book is a special note to parents and educators, which is attached. It reads, in part, "It is essential for parents to be alert to extremist propaganda and political maneuvering, especially by those groups claiming to have a monopoly on

the Judeo-Christian ethic." Does this appear to warn against those who may hold spiritual values as being extremist? What followed in the T-E School District was an indignant outcry by hundreds of parents who had attended the meetings and made thoughtful suggestions and comments in good faith but now could find no hint of their input in the pages of the new Family Life Education curriculum, school directors found themselves in an awkward situation. Since they had voted on a policy but had not examined the finished product, they were trapped. The money had been spent and it was too late to disapprove. The question still remained, where did some of this material come from, and why were parents' concerns virtually ignored? What was the rush to implement the first 13-year sex education program in Chester County? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there questions? (No response.) 128 CHAIRMAN COWELL: A couple questions that I would have. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Layden) Q. The program was implemented? A. Yes, it was. Q. And it is currently in use? A. The first leg of it is kindergarten through grade 5, and that is in place. Q. Uh-huh. A. We are now in the process of implementing the intermediate school and high school. Q. Does that program provide an opportunity for parents to opt-out? A. It does currently. The numbers are diminished and they feel that it will not be expedient to make room for these other children, so if you wish, in the future there's a possibility that option can be done away with. That's a possibility. Q. How many parents in fact are opting out? A. About 15 percent. Q. And is that pretty constant during the, I guess, two years of the program now, three years of the program? A. No, implementation — this will be the second year coming up in the spring semester. 129

Q. ohf okay. A. The numbers stay relatively the same. It's hard to really be sure. About 15 percent. Q. Okay. You've given us some graphic materials here. Some of this stuff we don't see often, and frankly I sometimes worry that some of the folks that are critical of these things are one of the greatest purveyors or the prolific purveyors of some of this material, otherwise we probably wouldn't see it at all. You specifically mentioned The Body Book, and I'm reading from part of your testimony now, I'm reading it backwards, though: "As I understand it, the planned parenthood of West Chester has a resource workbook which lists as a resource The Body Book". A. Tr ue. Q. And that's what you object to, The Body Book? A. Well, yes, and what I'm saying is, we're still using this. Q. Okay. And the question is, is The Body Book being used in your school district? A. As of this moment, no. We can't say in the future. Q. Has it been used in your school district? A. Not yet. Q. Okay. So you're objecting to a piece of 130

material that exists but which is not in use in your

district as far as you know? A. I'm objecting to how it got in there to begin with. Q. Okay. The Body Book, when you first introduced it in your testimony, you say that "some of the materials found through a three-county library search." Was that a search of public libraries, school libraries?

A. No, public libraries. Q. Public libraries. These were not school libraries? A. No, no. Q. These were public libraries? A. Yes. Q. So this was material that was out there for— A. In Upper Montgomery County, yes. Q. I don't know about the people in Upper Montgomery County, whether they read that stuff or not or how popular that is, but you're saying it was not in the school library? A. Not to my knowledge, no. It was nowhere to be found. Q. So you're objecting to the fact that your public officials, not your school officials but your 131 public officials, in Montgomery County and maybe a couple of other counties decided to spend money on that book? A. No, Ron, that's not the issue. The issue is the book had no business, to my way of thinking, being in the curriculum to begin with. Q. Uh-huh. A. It was not available and I doubt seriously that any of our local school administrators had seen it. Why was it in there? They were all surprised when we showed it, or appeared to be surprised, maybe that's the better word. I live in Chester County. Q. Okay. That's all. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MS. LAYDEN: Thank you, Ron. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Diane Welsh Carlin, from Havertown, PA. MS. CARLIN: Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Diane W. Carlin. I'm a full-time caregiver. Also, I'm a certified elementary school teacher, having taught in both the public and Catholic schools. I'm a member of the Haverford Township Republican Women, the League of Women Voters, the Association for Children and Adults with 132

Learning Disabilities, the Pennsylvania Association for Gifted Education, as well as a participant in Delaware County's Right to Education Task Force. I have served on the board of the Beechwood Civic Association, the Haverford Township Civic Council, the Chestnutwold P.T.A., the Oakmont P.T.O., and Cub Pack #144. I appear today as a concerned citizen in opposition to House Bill 2277. For the past five years I have been active within my community, particularly in support of community-oriented educational issues, which Representative Freind can verify. During recent community turmoil, I begged for Mr. Freind's intervention because of the school board's blatant scorn of the public and abusive use of power. He refused to become involved. He ridiculed my desire to testify before the House Education Committee, and he removed my name from his list of people interested in being kept abreast of educational issues. Do I feel angry and betrayed by Mr. Freind and House Bill 2277? In a word from his book: Abso-blanken- lutely.

I am angry because it appears to me that Mr. Freind lied to me on November 1, 1985. At that meeting he told me that he believed that the public's interests were best served without State interference because it was easier to remove school directors than to change 133 State law. I feel betrayed because as we discussed, I believe that a Parent and Pupil Protection Act is necessary because of the tremendous power granted local school boards and the limited rights guaranteed parents. Unfortunately, the primary concern of House Bill 2277 is

sex and schools and not parent or pupil protection. In preparing for my testimony, I personally requested a legal interpretation of House Bill 2277 from the Education Law Center here in Philadelphia. I have included my letter and the lawyer's response as part of my written testimony.

As you have already heard in previous testimony and as you can read in Ms. Glennon's interpretation, House Bill 2277 jeopardizes First and Fourteenth Amendment rights in various instances. Its implementation would be costly and cumbersome. The benefits would be few, if any, and the potential harm to children and their lives could be devastating. The bill fails to adequately address two basic issues: parental curriculum input and testing. Basically, I believe that an effective Parent and Pupil Protection Act should include a provision calling for public notice and a public hearing for all new curriculum. I have spent the last three years trying to find any way to have input into the elementary 134 curriculum. I was the P.T.O. Education Committee chairperson for two years, until I realized that the P.T.O. or parents were not to interfere with administrative policies, which included curriculum. Personally, I am more concerned about the books my son uses in all subjects and the methods used than whether he learns about condoms. I was extremely upset last year when in fourth grade he was required to read The Half Moon Inn, by Paul Fleischman. The book is about an apparently abandoned, mute 11-year-old boy who goes out in search of his mother, only to be drugged and enslaved by a witch who verbally, physically, and psychologically abuses him. But, at least he does not go to a private school where he could be required to purchase and read Mr. Freind's book, God's Children.

REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: We had to read it on the House floor. MS. CARLIN: Secondly, Federal and State laws and regulations adequately cover psycho-educational testing. What is not covered are all of those individual tests that are performed on your child for which notification is not required and results are rarely given to parents. My objection is not to the testing but in failing to notify me that some stranger is removing my son from his classes for testing and then not even giving 135 me the results. The more I know about my son's strengths . and weaknesses the more I can help him. House Bill 2277 fails to address this oversight. I would be pleased and glad to cooperate in any manner with the committee in developing a valid Parent and Pupil Protection Act. I agree with Pope John Paul II and his belief that, quote, "The family is the primary but not the only and exclusive educating community. Man's community aspect itself — both civil and ecclesial — demands and leads to a broader and more articulated activity resulting from well-ordered collaboration between the various agents of education."

In conclusion, I believe that the State Representative's character in God's Children best describes where Mr. Freind is coming from. Quote, "People like to get things...You can take a lump of dog- blank, stick your label on it, and they'd be grateful." Please, Mr. Freind, give the voters more credit and then take this lump, House Bill 2277, and find another place to stick it. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Carlin.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Steve, if we have enough hearings on your legislation we won't have to read your book. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: See the publicity 136 he's getting? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, I believe. Mr. Freind may have a different response to you. Steve? REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Certainly not. BY REPRESENTATIVE FRIEND: (Of Ms. Carlin) Q. Number one, Diane, always good to see you, always nice to see you. And I appreciate the PR you give the book. The kids like it too because they like to eat, so thank you very much.

A. That's why I figured it was the purpose of writing it. Q. Certainly one of the purposes was to make money. Certainly I will not deny that. A. I didn't pay for the book. I got it out of the library. Q. That's okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Let's get back to the bill. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Carlin) Q. Diane, I'm really confused because you and I have had many, many conversations and I try to be as helpful as I can be to you. I really don't know where you're coming from in the bill. It seems that your problem is an overall problem with the Haverford Township School District, a problem which you've had for a number 137 of years. Now, what you're saying is that the bill should go farther and mandate curriculum guidelines on all subjects? A. First off, I don't have a problem. What we're here to discuss is House Bill 2277 and the possible problems that I see in the bill. I don't have a problem with the Haverford Township School Board. I've been very active, I attend the meetings, and I give input where I feel it's appropriate. I was very concerned about the turmoil which some other Representatives might know about that took place a couple of years ago because of the unresponsiveness of the school board, but unlike some of the other testimony that we heard today, the people got together, and this had nothing to do with curriculum but it was the manner in which they treated the public, the people got together, and I'm glad to say that all six of those school board directors are no longer on the Haverford School Board. It can be done, even in Republican Haverford Township. What I'm getting at is I do believe that it is necessary to have the parent and Pupil Protection Act. I, myself, have become very involved in this issue because I have a child who is gifted as well as learning disabled. With that in mind, I have looked at the 138 special education laws very thoroughly, and thanks for the Task Force Right to Education I've been able to get more information on that. I think what I'm very upset with on this bill, and that's why you might have gotten some strains of anger— Q. I picked a few of those up. A. Did you? Good.

Q. I'm perceptive. A. you are perceptive, yes. The reason is you're having a lot of concern about sex and the schools. I think it's taking a lot of the attention away from the really primary need that we have to guarantee some rights for the parents because the parents are the primary advocates for the child, and if we don't have some rights or some input, then we cannot effectively perform our jobs as parents. Now, that is not to say that the public shouldn't dictate curriculum, but I do agree with your last statement in which I believe that there should be a parent protection act that does address the fact that any new curriculum that comes in should be put on public

display and should have public access, and sometimes after regular school hours, like at school board meetings, which I've attended many where I've been sitting there with just one other person, have them there 139 for the people to look at and have public hearings on. I think that's the only way — you know that I'm not a quiet person and I express my opinions very freely. For example, I know that the book that my son had to read for reading, The Half Moon Inn, what I did with that instance was use the system. First of all, I called the language arts coordinator. I expressed my concerns. Unfortunately, the language arts coordinator hadn't read the book. It doesn't make me very happy. Then I went on and I talked to my son and found out what he understood from this book, because I was outraged. I was very upset. I never had to deal with something like this. To be mandated to read this in a reading program blew my mind, especially since the book before was Talk Everlasting, that had to deal with death. Very uplifting reading. So I talked to him, found out what he got from it. And then I explained to him my position and why I felt this way, and we discussed it and we worked through. When we talk about this particular book, and it does come up because it did make an impression on him, I used this instance to teach my child my moral values and my religious values, and I think that's very necessary that we use the system. The system in Pennsylvania, and I see mostly the operation in Haverford Township, isn't 140 perfect, but there is enough there that you can use the system. But, you have to make your child's education one of your primary goals. You have to call the head of curriculum, you have to call and talk to people, serve those people, and you have to go and you have to do these things. One of the things, it doesn't matter how much you talk to them, right now they don't have to have public hearings and therefore the school board can get an undue influence from the superintendent and from people within the school, you know, the school professionals that could possibly not reflect what the community wants. And I agree that each community should decide these issues. What's good for Haverford is not necessarily what's good for Philadelphia or some other rural community, and that's why it's important to keep that in mind. Q. I understand and I certainly can't disagree. I mean, absolutely there should be parental involvement and absolutely there should be responsibility on the part of school districts. Having said all that, though, I still don't know what your opposition is to 2277. Merely the fact that it takes too much attention away from other issues? A. Okay, in regards to that, what I basically 141 did, I did two things in trying to come here today. I decided what would be a perfect pupil-parent protection act and I made an outline and tried to think of those types of ideas, but I didn't present those today because I figured it may not be germane to what we're talking now.

Then I also went through and I looked at each section. I could go through specific objections, if you wish. Q. Yeah, because to be honest with you, I'm not being smart, Diane. You have some great one-liners in your statement that I don't know where you're coming from on 2277. A. Okay. Q. And since I've always valued your opinion, which I think you're aware, notwithstanding what you said, I'd like to hear where you're coming from. A. Okay, basically I looked at this as two ways of doing it. My testimony could be either completely, you know, the specific things that I felt were wrong with your bill or looking at your bill and saying where are the real needs and why doesn't this bill meet it, and that's what I do in my testimony. Basically, if you look at 2501-A, the title, number one, is a misnomer. I think the short title, sex 142 education, is probably more appropriate, as I already addressed in my remarks. I also believe that parents have the opportunity to remove their children from any course, as far as I can understand, and I don't really see you find other solutions for it. I have to do this because I have a child that is learning disabled and gifted. He doesn't fall real well in the gifted programs, he doesn't fall real well in the learning disabled programs, and he doesn't fall real well in regular education. So I have to work out with the system and figure out what's best for my child and use what's available. Missing from Section 2502 is a definition for parents or legal guardians, and I think that's one of the major flaws that I find in the bill in that, for example, children under foster care would not be able to have anyone sign for them. One of the other problems with parents signing for things, in my capacity on the P.T.A. and working with the civic association and things like that, I've never, ever seen 100-percent response to anything. I feel that if the parents feel strongly enough about an issue, they should take care of it for their child. But you're not going to get 100-percent response. Foster 143 children would not be protected under this because the county takes over certain responsibilities but not necessarily all the responsibilities. So somehow they would have to be taken care of. One of the things that I thought was omitted, I think there should also be a definition for teachers in there. in 2502-A "Public Notice" does not indicate the language that must be used. For example, in Philadelphia you could use up to 12 different languages in order to make sure that they understood the mail that they were receiving. Also, you would have some other problems with non-English speaking parents but also illiterate parents. I mean, sending home something to an illiterate or dysfunctional family leaves that child out of education and therefore denies him equal access to education, which is in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

Q. Well, could I just ask a question about that? That's the same problem you face with a heck of a lot of things today, with field trips, with extra-curricular activities, and that's a very, very difficult problem to overcome. Any suggestions you might have we'd appreciate it. A. With doing it? I have a lot of concerns — you mentioned field trips. I have a lot of concerns when they go, you know, down to Washington. I take my child 144 to Washington. I'm not real thrilled about him going on a bus three hours down to Washington. Q. Which is fine, but— A. What's my solution? Q. Yeah. A. I go along with him. Q. But the point is, there is still an opt-in provision for that, exactly what we have here, you don't go on field trips, in most public school districts, unless you sign on. A. There's an opt-in because you're leaving the school premises, I believe, and there's legal ramifications in regards to that. Q. Exactly. A. There's also an opt-in in any type of sports program— Q. Exactly. A. —whether it's sponsored by the school, but those take place outside of the school. Q. Well, the sports don't. A. Well, the sports that you have to sign up for teams you have to— Q. They practice right on the school property. I mean, the reason for signing— A. I understand that, but there's legal and 145 medical implications— Q. Exactly. A. —and so they do that, but it's not mandatory. I don't have to sign anything for physical education. I do have to notify the medical office if there's any limitations for my child. Q. Sure, but if your son or daughter wanted to play football or if your girl wanted to play field hockey, you have to sign. A. After school, certainly. Q. Exactly. So I mean, do you think it should be opt-out or opt-in? A. In regards to curriculum? Q. Yeah. A. I think it should be opt-out. Q. Opt-out. You don't like the opt-in? A. Because of the reasons I gave you before, because of dysfunctional families and illiterate families and the fact that— Q. Well, you still have the problem with opt- out. They still get the notice they can opt their children out and if they can't read it, they're not even going to know what to opt them out of. A. That's where the parents have to — to me they have to go and — the primary function of the parent 146 or therefore whoever the educational advocate is for the child is to find out what's going on. Q. Which makes no difference between opt-out or opt-in then. A. Makes no difference between opt-out and opt- in? I believe it does, and I'm too nervous to figure out why. Q. No problem. Go ahead. We can talk later. A. If it's all right, when my mind clears a little bit I'll— Q. Diane, I'm not trying to nail you. I value your opinion. You know what you're doing and I value your opinion on this bill, which is why I'm asking the questions, and for no other reason. A. Right. The reason I came here and I sounded angry is because I think that this committee can do a lot for education and there are a lot of positive things that can be done, and I would like to see equal amount of attention put into parent input and protecting parents' rights instead of just focussing on sex education. That's it. Q. I basically get the feeling that what you would like to see, you may have some technical problems with the wording of this bill, but you would like to see the thrust of 2277 be extended to all of curriculum. 147 A. Yes, all of the curriculum. Q. So it's not that you're against the purpose of the bill, you just want to expand it. A. I don't like the fact that it discriminates against sex education in that that's the only one that you have any type of rights with. What I would like to see — see, just because I disagree with your bill on the whole doesn't mean that I necessarily disagree with every single provision. The reason I was angry is that unfortunately most of your work has to do with sex and I would like to see more things done in a different direction and a broader one. This is a particular area of education that—

Q. Are you saying most of my work? A. Most of your work that I hear about. Q. If that's the case, let me just say to you then, and I'm not trying to defend myself, that's not the purpose of the hearing, although you did take some very specific shots, then you haven't been reading for the last 12 years. A. Yes, I have, sir. Q. The newspapers will back up my work on law enforcement, on education, and you and I could go on and on. A. We could. I've also done a search at the 148 Philadelphia Library with the Philadelphia inquirer and I have all of your articles listed and all of your articles— Q. Well, keep in mind, Diane, please, you're so intelligent that you know that you can deal on law enforcement, you can deal on education, you can deal on my bill that floated bonds for higher education, but that doesn't make the headlines the media wants to hear. That's the one big issue. A. I agree. CHAIRMAN COWELL: With all due respect, could we get back on the bill? MS. CARLIN: That's fine with me. Do you want me to go on?

BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Carlin) Q. No, basically— A. I know you don't want me to go on, but I was asking if he does. Q. Basically, it seems to me that you want 2277 expanded to all of curriculum. A. Yes. Q. Fine. What I won't ask you now but I'd really love to know later is one of these times when I laughed at you when you wanted to come before the House Education Committee. I mean, I have no idea what you're 149 talking about. But again, Diane, always good to see you. Thanks for plugging the book. And, for at least the next couple of months, I'm still your State Rep, and if you have a problem, feel free to give me a buzz, as you've

done in the past and as I've always responded. A. Thank you very much. Q. Nice seeing you, Diane. A. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Evans. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Not a question as much as a comment, Mr. Chairman. Very rarely do I get an opportunity to comment to someone from Representative Freind's district that steps forth and makes comments, so I want to take advantage of this opportunity. I would not miss this, Steve. Very sincerely, not to take advantage of it but I say to you very sincerely that I would also be for public protection of parents. Although Representative Freind and I disagree on various issues, I think you do raise some good points about things that we need to do. We need to refine the process, and certainly your input 150 has been very important. I don't necessarily look at it as an attack, but it's something that we as a committee, as members of the General Assembly, could really look at and have a balanced approach. I think that's what I hear you expressing to us, that we need to look at it a little closer, not just focussing on one particular area. So I applaud your comments and want to say very sincerely, Steve Freind is still one of my best friends. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Davies. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: I'd like to see those other ideas you have about the process, about preparing an input process, just if you will. MS. CARLIN: I'll type them up. I don't think you want my notes. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Okay. Fine. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. •MS. CARLIN: Thank you very, very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness was scheduled to be Patricia jardine, and I understand that she was not able to attend but may submit written 151 testimony. Our next witness is Barbara DiTullio, Delaware County National Organization for Women. For the information of members and others who will stay with me until the end of the day, we are now on a schedule which I would project to end about 5:15. MS. DiTULLIO: My name is Barbara DiTullio. I am a resident of Delaware County and the mother of two children, ages 14 and 11, presently attending school in Southeast Delco. I am currently involved in a teen pregnancy project in Delaware County. I'm also a member of Delco Children and parents Support, and am the local chapter president of Delaware County National Organization for Women.

After reading HB 2277, I was disappointed to find that every Delaware County legislator, except Bob Wright from the city of Chester, were cosponsors. Recently, three Montgomery County Representatives withdrew their cosponsorship after thoroughly reading the bill. My own Representative admitted that he did not read it. I can only hope that all legislators, especially those from Delaware County, would take seriously the act of cosponsorship and read all proposals before putting their name to it. There is only one statement within this 152

entire bill that I can agree with, and that is that abstinence is the only sure means of preventing AIDS and pregnancy. To my first point about parental consent, regarding the issue of parental consent I see nothing wrong with the current system. Every parent has the right to review the sex education curriculum and exempt their child if they so desire. To reverse this process to written prior approval will only hurt those children that may need it the most. It would be ideal if every parent took an active and responsible role in the education of their children, but unfortunately this is not the case. I care about what happens to those other children, and I believe prior written consent could be damaging to them.

My second point, board approval for sex education. The process outlined in this section of local school boards holding public hearings, adopting resolutions as to whether or not to provide sex education to the final steps of mailing notices and distributing curriculum outlines would be an administrative burden and added cost to local taxpayers. This could force many districts to drop sex education altogether. AIDS education. To limit AIDS education to three times in 12 years, that is, once in elementary, 153 once in junior, and once in senior high school, is absurd. No one can predict how the course of this devastating disease will turn. We should not put the lives of our children in jeopardy through lack of sufficient education.

To my third point about prohibited health services. Section 2507, prohibited Health services, seems to overlook the fact that students develop communications with different teachers, counselors, and/or healthcare professionals. What happens to the student who has developed trust and communication with her homeroom teacher or school nurse and wants to know how she can tell if she's pregnant? That teacher, under this proposed legislation, would be unable to make any referrals to the student. Teachers, counselors, and school nurses would be prohibited from giving any information.

The most important point I want to make here today also deals with Section 2507-A and the maker's lack of foresight regarding teen pregnancy. This section outright bans the very services that have been proven in numerous studies to substantially reduce teenage pregnancy. The United States has the highest rate of teen pregnancy among industrialized nations with the 154 pregnancy rate at 96 per 1,000, compared with 14 per 1,000 for the Netherlands. A study concluded in 1985 by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which is a research and educational organization, concluded that the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy were in countries that have liberal attitudes toward sex and had comprehensive programs in sex education.

The authors of this study, in viewing sex education in this country, reported that it varies from one school to the next, and cited it as a major factor affecting adolescent pregnancy. In Sweden, an official curriculum is mandatory and is taught in all grades. Furthermore, the report stated that one reason for the more successful experience of European countries may be that public attention was generally not directly focused on the morality of earlier sexual activity but rather was directed at a search for solutions to prevent increased teen pregnancy.

There has been a move in some progressive areas of our country to implement pilot projects around school-based clinics. St. Paul, Minnesota is one outstanding example of school-based adolescent health care clinics which provide a full range of health care services in addition to sex education information, counseling, and family planning. During a 3-year period 155 at one school, the pregnancy rate declined from 79 to 35 births per 1,000, a decline of 56 percent. The dropout rate among girls who delivered and kept their children declined from 45 percent to 10 percent. Section 2507-A would ban this concept entirely. Do we want to shut the door on a possible solution to teen pregnancy by passing this piece of legislation? I would hope not. More information, more education, not less, is the key to helping our children's journey into adulthood. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Are there questions? Representative Freind. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Hello, Barbara. It's good to see you again. You know, fortunately, Mr. Chairman, I'm glad I'm not paranoid because if I were, I would begin to be a little suspicious, and no reflection on you, but the fact that at these hearings today we have three witness, one of whom is my opponent, another who is from my district who takes an incredible shot at me, and the third is a very, very nice young lady who two months ago put out a fundraising letter to solicit funds not to elect my opponent but to defeat Stephen Freind. So it's nice to have these non-biased witnesses here today. MS. DiTULLIO: Thank you, Steve. 156 REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: At any rate, but always good to see you. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: They have a right to come before the committee. REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: I don't think that we should have members of the committee in any way seem to denigrate the integrity of the people who are appearing before the committee. I didn't hear Representative Freind say anything about the supporters which spoke before the committee, so I would hope that at least his comments not be reviewed as coming from the committee entirely.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Some would say, Chaka, that the people who are trying to defeat me, that's not denigrating their reputations, that may be increasing them. REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: I don't want people to feel intimidated in terms of appearing before this committee. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: I don't really think, Chaka, that's at all happening. Barbara, do you feel intimidated? MS. DiTULLIO: Not by you, Steve.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Good. See what I mean? 157 CHAIRMAN COWELL: I take Representative Freind's remarks as another attempt to be humorous, and we addressed that last week, and sometimes he succeeds and sometimes he does not, but we certainly don't want anyone to feel intimidated. We have accepted requests from any and every person who requested an opportunity to testify till the agenda became as full as it is, and we did not know where people were coming from or on what side they were going to testify. Some people indicated that, but there are a number of people here and I'm looking, wondering whether they're going to be for or against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: And let me say in all seriousness, Mr. Chairman, that certainly was not directed at you. I have no problems with the manner in which you've conducted these hearings. just a couple questions. MS. DiTULLIO: Sure. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. DiTullio) Q. you want opt-out and not opt-in? A. That's correct. Q. You appear to have no problem with the section where you stress, and we appear to agree, that abstinence is the only completely reliable way to avoid AIDS and unwanted pregnancies and venereal disease. 158 A. That's a fact. Q. Fine. So we're making progress. A. We agree. Q. Okay. Now, AIDS education. Now, you're aware the section in the bill is identical to the regs which are already in law? A. Urn-hum. Q. That it doesn't say only three times. A. Right. Q. I mean, that's a local — they can give it every year if they want, but the regs, and the bill just repeats the regulation, saying once in the primary, once in middle school, and once in high school. A. That's fine, but I still even would think that I'd like to see it expanded, especially in senior high school. Q. Okay. A. in other words, just to answer and let you know where I'm coming from, I would like to see State mandated guidelines and I'd like to see from the local level parents getting involved in helping to set the education and to get involved in the process of sex education if that's what they so desire. But I believe we need the mandates and we need outlines or at least specific things set at the State level, and I think AIDS 159 education is one of those things. And I think we need more, not less. Q. Okay. But you're aware, just to make a point, that the bill is not attempting to water anything down.

A. Right, but it's a minimum. Q. Okay, exactly. A. Um-hum. Q. All right. Prohibited Health Services. Now, you know that that section relates to specific providing of contraceptives, recommending a specific course of action or recommending to a specific doctor. A. Also referrals. Q. And referrals. Exactly right. A. yes. Q. And again, and I'd like your help with this, in addition to a lot of other issues that we talk about relating to this, you have a legal fact, I don't know if you were here earlier, where the law says that the parent of a minor child has a legal responsibility to attend to the health and welfare of that child, and if that parent deviates from that and violates that, that parent can be legally responsible. How do we permit students to receive devices, referrals for surgical procedures, which in fact can have 16 0

a direct impact on that health of that student without the parents, who have the legal responsibility, even be included? A. I think you're still assuming that everybody1s operating maybe in a township such as Havertown where you have very maybe upper white middle class, and this is not the way the whole State is, and I would hate seeing laws imposed where it's going to hurt children that need this education the most. What happens about those parents that don't take their responsibility seriously in parenting? Are we going to prosecute them because they're not doing it? Q. So in other words, what you're saying, and this is where we get down to a philosophical problem, is if we, whoever "we" are, don't think the parents are doing a proper job, whatever that term may be, then it's our job, the government can come in and do what they should be doing and we'll take their place? A. The government should be setting standards to protect children, and I believe that if parents aren't doing what they're supposed to do— Q. Then we'll do it for them? A. —the government has to be able to provide a minimum of education and be able to make children aware. Q. We're not talking education now. We're 161 talking about directly providing services to them. Providing them contraceptives, referring for abortions— A. I would love to see clinics at our schools. I mean, there's no doubt about that. Q. Well, I figured. A. I would love to see organizations like Planned Parenthood thoroughly involved in our school districts. Q. But I mean, you believe that the school has a right to do that, and if the parents aren't doing their job, we should take the parents* place? A. I would like to see the schools and the teachers and the parents at local school districts get involved with deciding that. If the State were to set minimum guidelines mandating certain kinds of requirements, each local school district could see to it the way they want to achieve it. in St. Paul, Minneapolis, that's done on a pilot project in five, I think it's five, schools. in Chicago with disabled, which was another school-based clinic. In Dallas and Kansas City. These clinics are really spreading all over, and I think that that was really the intent of this bill, and that was to stop those kinds of things. Q. Well, let me just point one thing out to you, Barbara. You can look at those stats from Minnesota and 162 say because of the school-based clinic or because of the stats show that when an enacted legislation to require parental input and parental consent or board approval with respect to abortion, that that generated the type of communication with the parents where they had a tremendous statewide decrease in teenage pregnancies, unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and teenage childbirths.

A. Steve, there's a new article out. I'm sorry I didn't bring that with me today because you brought up the Abortion Control Act, but there's new stats out about second trimester abortions with parental consent. it has not reduced— Q. in Minnesota? A. No, here in this State. It has not reduced— Q. We don't have parental consent. A. It's still going on. Q. The last thing — we have no parental consent. Just take a look at the Minnesota statute. The last thing that really confuses me, it seems to say, one of the studies you cite, that we'll do better and be more successful with respect to sex education if there's not as much of a focus both in schools and in society on morality, morality of earlier sexual activity. is that what we should do? A. Morality meaning judgmental. 163 Q. So in other words, there are no moral absolutes? You know, it's kind of a pluralistic society— A. The parents are responsible for teaching their children values. Q. Exactly. A. And if the parent is involved with the school district to help the teachers, I trust the teachers that have my children because I meet them and I know where they're coming from. And when I send them off to school, I have not opted them out of anything. I trust the curriculum. It's there in place. I believe that the teachers are professionals, they know best how to teach these things, and I take this as my personal responsibility to augment that kind of education at home. I sit down and talk to my children especially about sex education. I have a 14-year-old son and an 11-year-old daughter. That's my responsibility. Q. And of course, therefore, you realize that in the bill, and I think you agree with the provision, there's nothing that's saying what has to be taught, there's no requirement to— A. I understand that. Q. And you have no problem with the stressing of the abstinence that we have in the bill? 164 A. That's true. Q. We're in a fairly good agreement on a considerable part of this bill. A. Just the abstinence. Q. It's always good seeing you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there other questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. DiTullio) Q. You say that your children are in Southeast— A. Southeast Delco. Q. That's the name of the school? A. Southeast Delco School District, um-hum. Q. Okay. And you are involved with their sex education in that school? A. I have seen what they've received, yes. Q. And you approve? A. Yes. Q. And you have seen the material used and you've talked to the teacher and you're satisfied? A. I've had no problems, so there wasn't a need to talk to the teacher. I talk to the teacher about their total education, not just about sex education. Q. You talk to the teacher about— A. About the curriculum in general, their entire — when I talk to my children's teachers, I talk to them 165 about all the subjects they may teach. My 11-year-old has one basic teacher, then there's a couple of other teachers that she may go to for reading instruction and things of this sort. My son is now in high school so he'll have more than one teacher, but up until this point

when I would talk to any of the teachers I would talk about their entire curriculum and not just sex education. Q. Your second point had to do with administrative burden and added cost to the taxpayers. A. Um-hum. Q. Do you have any figures in mind for that as to the total cost to the taxpayers? A. No. I was hoping that some of the school board associations that may be here would testify to that. I don't consider myself an expert, although I have friends that are on the various school boards in Delaware County, but I don't have any facts and figures. Q. It would appear to me that, you know, we always should be interested in added costs to the taxpayer, not just on this subject but on many others. Now, Steve did clarify your statement here, you know, that this bill does not limit.it as far as AIDS is concerned. It just goes in concert with their regulation as it is presently proposed. You say that the teacher in this proposed 166 legislation would be unable to make any referrals to the student. Could you explain that? A. Well, the best thing I could think of is that I know of a young woman, a teenager, she was 13 when she became pregnant in the Southeast Delco School District. I would think under this legislation she could not have gone to a teacher to say, "How do I know if I'm pregnant?" And she did not know until maybe a week before she delivered a baby. But my point is that if she wanted to know under this legislation, she could not talk to a teacher other than the teacher who is the sex education teacher, if it were approved in that school district. If sex education were outlawed in that school district, then there would be nobody she could go to anyhow.

Q. So what you're really saying to me is that after you're satisfied with your daughter's education in her school district, if she, in spite of all the good things that have happened at home and everything, if she becomes pregnant and she is referred to this psychologist or the school nurse and the school nurse says, well, you know, the clinic is down the street, it will take us a lunch hour, we could go down and have the abortion and come home, that would not concern you as a parent? A. I would hope that I have taught my children 167 and I believe that I have that kind of rapport with my children that they will turn to me with any problem first, and that I would be the one that would help them. Q. Would you be concerned in that same situation, because you said you were concerned for all children— A. Um-hum. Q. —would you be concerned if it was another child and this was happening? A. I would be concerned and that's why I'm really in favor of giving more education because I believe that some of the statistics that have been shown with the school-based clinics have reduced the amount of abortions, have even reduced teen pregnancy and have kept children in school to finish their education. And in fact, I do have some statistics which I will copy and send to the committee about some of the clinics that have happened— Q. That was my next question, Barbara, was, you know, it's hard to determine from just, you know, the kind of overall generalities in that last point. A. Right. Q. you're saying numerous studies. How many were in that program? You know, how many are in the program? is it 75 percent of that or are there 500? 168

A. Right. I have a couple reports which I will duplicate and send — can I send one copy to you, Representative Cowell? CHAIRMAN COWELL: We'll get them out. MS. DiTULLIO: And you'll get them out. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Fattah. REPRESENTATIVE FATTAH: Yes. In response to your question with Representative Freind you stated that it was in fact related to Section 2508-A related to AIDS, and Steve has been saying all morning asking people whether they agree with that, and I just wanted to get clear on the record, Mr. Chairman, that there are other recognized ways in which AIDS has been transmitted in this country. in fact, the most growing population now is through intravenous drug users and that we should not continue as a committee and in this legislation suggest that the only way that people are catching this dreadful disease is through their sexual behavior. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Well, since that's directed at me, Chaka, you well know that I was the one who amended the AIDS regs to reflect not just that but the only completely reliable way to avoid AIDS in drug transmission is through abstinence. This is a sex 169 education bill but clearly we put that in. And we did a wonderful job, as you'll remember, in the House Education Committee we amended it, it was adopted unanimously by the State Board, which clearly has the drug users in there.

REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: I brought that up earlier, Steve.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Just an observation. Several people have described the wonderful job this committee did with the AIDS regulation. We contributed to that regulation, and frankly, I think we did a pretty good job.

In that context, your criticism about AIDS instruction at only three grade levels is probably a little off target. MS. DiTULLIO: I will admit, it was a little off target. CHAIRMAN COWELL: However, you might be more on target to suggest that this legislation, if passed in its current form, would be a retreat from the good job that this committee previously did where we require the AIDS instruction and do provide an opt-out provision. This legislation, as most people have interpreted it, 170 would shift that to an opt-in requirement and probably would lead to some reduction in the number of students who in fact did participate in the AIDS instruction program. That's just an observation. MS. DiTULLIO: That's a very good observation. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MS. DiTULLIO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I was told that the next two witnesses are Patricia Long and Joan Scalia. MS. LONG: Right. There was a confusion on that. I didn't know that Joan and I were to share this time. Joan does not have a prepared address to bring to you and I do, so we made an agreement on the way over here. CHAIRMAN COWELL: So you're Patricia Long? MS. LONG: Yes, I am. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And you're going to take the full five minutes? MS. LONG: Yes, I am. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Go ahead. MS. LONG: Thank you. I am here today as a parent with two children 171 enrolled in the Downingtown School District. One is 7 and she in the second grade, and the other is 13 and he is in eighth grade. He's here beside me. My concern is that as a parent I have tried to become involved in my children's education by inquiring about a rumor I have heard concerning the fact that the Downingtown School District was going to adopt a sex education curriculum. I became aware of this rumor about three years ago when at that time I contacted Mr. Dan Jones, Assistant to the Superintendent of the Downingtown Schools, to see if in fact this rumor were true or not. Mr. Dan Jones did return my call and assured me that it was indeed a rumor and that there was going to be a task force formed to study how the children of the Downingtown School District could be given information on sex education with the full acknowledgement of the parents being involved and approving such information. He took my name and inferred that since I was a concerned parent that I would be a good parent to have on that task force. I never heard from him again as far as asking me to be on that task force. The next time I heard about this sex education curriculum was at a board meeting in the spring of 1987. At this board meeting I heard from the board 172 members that the education of the children of Downingtown should be left to the educators, who were the professionals. I rebutted this information to one of the local newspaper reporters by saying that the parents were the professionals. We as parents are the ones who take our professions as parents seriously and we as parents are the ones who are raising our children with morals and values and we are the ones who monitor our children's behavior when something that is hurtful happens to them. I believe the way the sex education curriculum is written is very hurtful and damaging to my children.

After that board meeting, I was told that when the sex education material came out that we as parents would have sufficient time to study the material and give our input. So at the beginning of the 1987-88 school year, last September, I made an appointment to go over to the School Administration Building in Downingtown to study the curriculum. I spent about two hours at that time reading and discerning the material and I took several notes on the areas which I felt was given mis­ information. At this same time, and when I had finished doing this, Mr. Jones came into the room to discuss with me what I thought about this material. I started to tell him that I felt some of it was misleading to our children, especially the part on birth control and 173 abortion. When I went on to explain that if the school district wishes to teach that the use of birth control and abortion were value choices that a student needs to make, that the school district should also teach the consequences of the complications that could occur if a student uses birth control or chooses to have an abortion. If abstinence is not going to be the only form of instruction and if the school district deems it necessary to market these birth control and birth destroying devices, that the district should take the responsibility to fully instruct and not partially instruct the students. Mr. Jones at that point expressed that indeed it was not his responsibility to give information on the complications and on the damaging effects of birth control and abortion but that was for the medical professionals to do and he was not a medical professional. I thought precisely that, that the school district should not be in the business of marketing birth control and abortion for they did not have nor would they give the students the information that would show how damaging it is for the students to make such choices. I feel that the only information that a school district would be required to teach should be 174 information that would most benefit the student by educating the student that the healthiest decision they could make is to wait until they are married before having sex. This and only this information should be what a school district's responsibility in instructing our children should be. Any other information is again contributing to a destructful way of living, especially in our crucial times when AIDS is so prevalent and becoming more so. With my notes and my thoughts on the sex education curriculum, I wrote a letter to the School Board of Downing town outlining the specific areas that I felt the board needed to make changes in the curriculum. I then attended the next board meeting, which was September 9, 1987. At this board meeting, the board moved the sex education item to last on the agenda. The board went through the whole agenda and then asked for any further speakers. When they did this, I rose and requested that my letter outlining the specifics of the sex education curriculum to be read. At this point the board expressed that they no longer were taking any further discussion on the curriculum and refused me my right to read my letter to them at this board meeting. I was confused because they said that the parents' input was important to them and that the parents would be able 175 to study the curriculum and that the parents' input would he heard. So why then did my board members get up and leave the room twice, along with some of the educators in the room, just to deny me my opportunity to be heard? I believe that I was being censored by the board and that they had no intentions of hearing what the parents who were opposed to this curriculum had to say.

Also, after the September 9th board meeting, I was told by other concerned parents that the video for the values and Choices was at the School Administration Building and if we wanted to we could make an appointment to go in and view it. Again, I received this information from a parent for it was not public knowledge that concerned parents could look at this video. My husband and myself made an appointment for a Monday morning and spent about 3 1/2 hours watching the video. My husband especially was very upset over the contents of this film which was going to be shown to our children. There were several instances that were shown that were entirely against what we teach our children at home about the family and what they are taught as far as values. At any rate, the next board meeting was October 13th, and at that board meeting the auditorium that was used was full to capacity with concerned parents. The board did allow discussion at this board 176 meeting on the sex education curriculum but also took a vote at that meeting and voted the curriculum in. I asked the board why no one from the board answered my letter to them that they would not allow me to read at the previous board meeting. No one answered me and I have still not received a reply to that letter that was dated September 9, 1988 addressing the specifics of where I felt the curriculum was misleading.

They also had from one board meeting to another to answer me and choose not to answer my letter. My question is why did they say from the beginning that the parents would have the full acknowledgment of what this curriculum entailed and would be involved in giving input, which I believe would mean disagreement, but the parents were completely shut out and they did get involved? They were also, as a board, agreeing at this board meeting, since so many parents did not show up to express their concerns, that these parents were for their curriculum. The truth is that there was very little advertising of the adoption of this curriculum and that that adoption would take place so soon in the school year that most of the parents were kept unaware of this intent to adopt this curriculum. There was a school district newsletter that came out late August giving some 177 information, but again, that was the only information I remember seeing from the school district, and from the time we could finally get in to study the curriculum and video, it was so brief of a time that it was also not enough time. So here I am this year with my eighth grade son, jason, having a health book which again is new this year with a Unit 5 that I am completely opposed to having him taught. I did meet with his health teacher and have already expressed my husband and my wishes to have him opt-out of his studies during the time this Unit 5 is going to be taught. So I ask you all here today to please vote on this p.A.P.P.A. Act so that parents could once again have the opportunity of being a complete parent with none of our rights and none of our voices being denied to us by any public school district. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Long.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Long) Q. Thank you for your testimony. As you know, I am very familiar with the district since that's my school district, one of the ones I represent, and I have to express my great disappointment in the fact that the school board did not have time to hear you in the 178 beginning when perhaps your input would have been very important to them. Am I correct in saying that there is, as a result of the lack of parent input, you were able to form a group of interested parents? Would you tell us something about that? A. Well, I'm not really involved in that group, okay? I haven't had the time. I am a counsellor at a crisis pregnancy center. I spend most of my time counseling women in a crisis pregnancy, mostly teens. A lot of that energy goes into helping them through a full- term pregnancy, so for me to extend my time and energy any further outside of the home I'm not able to be a part of that group.

Q. But you are aware of their efforts? A. Yes, I am. And I'm in agreement with them. Q. Do you think they made any inroads at all into — before the adoption of that program? A. Any inroads? Q. Influencing some of the material that was considered. A. It didn't seem that any of us made any influence. The board already had preconceived ideas and made a decision to vote that curriculum in regardless of how much time we had spent studying it, even though there 179 was a little time given to us. They just ignored us completely. Q. And can you help me in pinpointing the exact time that the program was implemented? Was that in September?

A. it did start right away because they had last year, in '87, because they had an in-service day I think immediately following that school board meeting, that Friday of that week they had an in-service day to implement this curriculum so that the teachers would be able to use this curriculum in the eighth grade. Q. So it has been in effect one year? A. It has been in effect one year. Now, my son is in the same eighth grade, and I mainly studied the eighth grade curriculum. I went through the other part of it but mainly the values and Choices is where I specifically opposed a lot of that information. My son now is having to be opted out of this program. it again is going to be a lot of pressure on him because of this happening. He might be the only student. So far when I asked his health teacher he was the only student. And if you'd like him to speak, let him speak for himself on his feelings on what it's going to be like not to participate with his class. Q. That was my next— 180

BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Jason Long) Q. If you'd like to make a few words, Jason, let me ask you a specific question. What do you think that this is going to do to your reputation or the standing that you might now have, the relationship that you might have, with your classmates? A. Well, they're really going to think — they're going to make fun of me, probably some of my own friends will, but I do know it's the right thing to do and they don't know the full situation so they have no right to make fun of me in the first place. And I will be put in another health chapter. I will be put in like learning the different parts of the body, the bones and everything, which is really what I should be learning.

Q. Jason, when you are not in that class, where will you be sitting? Where will you physically be? The library, or the gym, swimming pool? Where will you be? A. That I don't know. I don't know where they're going to— MS. LONG: I think his health teacher did tell me he would be in a library.

BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Jason Long) Q. And at that time, Jason, do you know whether or not you will be expected to be working on this project of bones and whatever they give you to work on? 181 A. Yes. I'll be working — I don't know the full situation yet. I don't know if there's going to be a teacher teaching me or I'll have to do my own independent work, but I won't be learning anything dealing with sex education.

Q. Jason, do you know anybody else in Downingtown School District that opted out? Did you ever talk to another student? A. Well, one of my friends was going to opt-out. My mom talked to his mother and I don't know, I don't think she is, but I think she did feel pretty strongly about it too and he doesn't really know a lot about it. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Thank you. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Long) Q. Mrs. Long, I want to be sure I understand correctly. As I understand the scene right now, your son, Jason, is the only student who apparently will be opted out of this program and you're concerned about reaction of the students to Jason. I've got two boys a couple years older than he is. They've been embarrassed when they wore braces and all kinds of things happen. It causes discomfort. Is your proposed solution to this to create a system that will bring about more students not participating in the program? A. I have nothing to say for anyone else's 182

child. I stand here as a parent only in concern with my own children. I think it's totally unfair that my children's education has to be interrupted with this added addition of information that is of no value to them and that it should be an opt-in program instead of an opt-out program so that my child's education is not disrupted.

Q. But as I understand it, you are the only parent who has made that judgment. A. So far to my knowledge. There might be others, but to my knowledge in this eighth grade school year I might be the only parent. Q. And even other parents with whom you have spoken who apparently are fully knowledgeable about what is being offered— A. No, they're not fully knowledgeable. The one woman that Jason just referred to is a woman that's in my neighborhood. She's a handicapped woman, she has a very hard time. She has three children, she works for the VA Hospital. This woman is just managing to take care of her home. Right now she's in a wheelchair and has a very good heart, but I don't see her having the time and the energy to become involved in this. She has the same morals and values that I have, but as far as her extending herself, I can't speak for her. She might and 183 she might not. I'm not going around trying to have people agree with me. I stand on my own with this. Q. You don't believe that you're the only parent in the district— A. I don't understand your question. It's not for me to speak for other parents, okay? I said I'm here to speak for myself.

Q. But your solution would involve other parents and other children. A. My solution would be if they wanted to bring added information into a curriculum, that that added information such as this should be an opt-in program, and that the parents really make that decision in that respect rather than turning it around and using the fact that maybe many parents aren't taking the time to become involved to make it an opt-out program to have our children singled out. I don't think these children whose parents want them to be in a program like this would be given any kind of — I don't think students would make fun of them. I think students would tend more to make fun of someone who's being opted out because he might be called a baby or what's wrong with you? Jason has heard about sex since the age of 6 when he asked the right questions and got the right answers to those questions. It just amazed me that by 184 the time he was 9 he didn't know what we told him when he was 6 and it was all told to him. So to start a child at an early age, kindergarten, and tell them how babies are conceived, I don't think it's something that they perceive. We told him the whole idea of how a child is conceived. He forgot by the time he was 9. Q. In your written remarks you say that, and I'm reading from page 2, you feel that "the only information that a school district would be required to teach should be information that would most benefit the student by educating the student that the healthiest decision they could make is to wait until they are married before having sex. This and only this information should be what a school district's responsibility in instructing our children should be."

is that what you want the school district— A. That's what I really believe— Q. For all children? A. —that the school district's only responsibility is, as far as serving the general public and the welfare of the general public. They have no right to market birth control or to market abortion. It is an industry, it's a profit-making industry. Q. Well, there's a difference between taking your statement and limiting the information to only 185 abstinence, and I'll paraphrase, and jumping to the other extreme that you just jumped to. There's a lot of information in between. A. Right. I don't know what you want me to say. I mean, the woman before me spoke about statistics. I have statistics in front of me also. I mean, we can go on and argue this for days, and this was put out by Planned Parenthood themselves saying that they find that most teens are chaste and trust their parents for information on sex. Again, it's got to be left to the parents. I counsel girls all day long. They come from probably the lowest income environment and parents are still involved at that stage of income. Also, the fact is that I'm finding more and more a lot of young girls want to be pregnant because a sense of identity has been taken from them. They no longer identify themselves with any self-worth or self- value, and I believe it might be their problem with public education might have added to this, and because of that they want their babies. It gives them a sense of identity and they want to be mothers and they want someone to love. So it's working in reverse. As far as giving them more information, you can't even get a child to brush their teeth every day, 186 how do you expect a girl to take a pill at the same time every day? A teenager — ask my son. I can't get him to brush his teeth every day. Really. it doesn't make any sense to me to see that they would act in an adult manner to take a medication that would upset their hormonal balance and allow them to maybe have difficulties with their bodies and then expect them to take that responsibly every day. I get phone calls all day long, women get pregnant even taking the pill. So how does this information help anyone? It doesn't help. The condom. I get phone calls saying that the condom pops off on people and that even adults have called that the condom has popped off and has gotten stuck inside the woman, and that's an adult calling. Or I get phone calls in the middle of the night asking me what happens, my condom just popped off? Can I be pregnant? just giving them these extra articles to use to prevent pregnancy still does not prevent pregnancy. people need to know their self-worth, their self-value, and their self-esteem, and that is not being taught today. It's being brought on them instead.

Q. To go back to the rhetorical question, you asked what I wanted you to say. I don't think we want you to say anything in particular, you know, most of us, I think, are genuinely interested in hearing what 187 everybody has to say, and there are certainly contrasting points of view, and ultimately we're going to have a responsibility to perform a balancing act, and part of that balancing act is going to require making judgments about some things, and one of the things that we ultimately need to determine is how we are going to balance the need to protect your genuine rights and those of your son and the children across this Commonwealth and yet balance that against the other side of the coin where the reality might be that in fact you may be a minority? You might be a correct minority, but you may be a minority and, you know, we need to guard against passing laws that will impose your views, even though they are correct.

A. Right. But what I'm trying to get back to, let's use our logic here also. When we tell our children not to drink and drive, do we bring an alcoholic into the classroom and say, "Let's see, though, if you do drink and drive, let's listen to how this drunk is able to do it and get away with it." That's the same idea if you bring birth control into the classroom. You're telling these children the best way is abstinence, but, wow, you're doing it, let's see how you can do it and not get pregnant and still maybe you can contact some sexual diseases or maybe you can end up with AIDS and die, but 188 we're going to show you how to do it anyhow because we know you have minds of your own. That's really assuming a lot of information on these kids that they don't need. Q. Well, again, I don't mean to debate it or badger you at all. A. You're not. Q. I hope not. A. I'm a street kid and it takes a lot to upset me. Q. I really am interested in determining — we've heard excellent testimony on both sides of it. I've got to thank everybody that's come last week and this week and hopefully out in Pittsburgh in a couple of weeks. We really need to determine if some of the views that we're hearing by the proponents of the legislation about not the basic principles, because there are a lot of basic principles of which there is no debate. The abstinence stuff, I haven't heard a lot of serious debate about that, and basic information giving and certainly the opt-out, questions as to whether you're going to opt- in, no debate about that. But what we really need to determine is if we're hearing from a group of parents who may in fact. find themselves frustrated because in their own respective districts they're in a minority or they have 189 not found a responsive audience or they've not been able to unelect the school board or they've not chosen to run for school board themselves and now they're simply coming to the legislature asking us to impose on all the 501 districts alike in this State their view, which again may be correct, but— A. Well, hasn't Planned Parenthood done that with the education in this country? Haven't they imposed their view? Q. Well, we have not addressed that issue in the legislature. A. Right. Well, by asking me if I'm a frustrated individual— Q. I'm not asking if you're frustrated. A. Yeah, I think you just inferred that. I really do. I'm not frustrated. I mean, this is life to me. I expect to go on life as usual, but this is part of living . Q. The issue is, we have not interceded, as a legislature, to require sex ed. The only closest we've come to that is as a committee, House and Senate, we have agreed to State Board regulations requiring the AIDS instruction in three grade levels minimum. That's the closest we've come to interceding legislatively to say that we are going to impose something on all 501 190 districts, regardless of how people feel locally, among those 501 very different districts. And this legislation proposes that we take a more serious step. Some of it is procedural, but certainly there are content implications ultimately, and that's why your testimony and your views are valuable, and I can only assure you that people are genuinely interested. Some of us ask questions to force a little bit more debate back and forth so it's helpful. A. Okay. Thank you.

Oh, this is his health book, if any of you would like to look through it. It's the new book and it really goes into— Q. And Unit 5 is what you object to? A. It's unit 5, starting on page 284, I think it is, and it really goes into birth control and abortion. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Jason. MR. J. LONG: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Fay Trail, from Downingtown. MS. TRAIL: Okay, my name is Kay Trail, not Fay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. We have it incorrectly identified on the agenda. Thank you. MS. TRAIL: That's all right. 191 I'm a mother of three children and an educator certified to teach secondary and early childhood education. I have taught at Roosevelt junior High School in Philadelphia, worked for the State of Pennsylvania in Public Welfare, and have taught pre-school at the YMCA and Windsor Pre-school. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here today. I know that as our elected officials you are very concerned about the education of our children and the rights of parents to actively participate in their children's education. In the Parent and Pupil Protection Act that is under consideration today, now I have said point number 6 because this is what I had received. Now, this might not follow— CHAIRMAN COWELL: You're referring to a summary of the bill? MS. TRAIL: Yes. Okay. It states that school districts, with limited exceptions, should be barred from requiring pupils to submit to psychiatric/psychological testing or treatment designed to reveal sexual behavior and attitudes, potentially embarrassing mental or psychological problems, critical appraisal of their parents, and certain other information that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal 192 privacy. This point is already an essential part of the Hatch Amendment. In October of the 1986-87 school year, my daughter, Heather, was subjected to the "Mind Test" at Downing town Senior High School. We were given no notification that our children were to take this test. The test was given prior to the school board's approval of the sexuality education program. My daughter was upset and said the test assumed that she had already had premarital sex and asked very inappropriate questions. I've included a copy of the test and I would like you to look at a few of the questions with me now. Number 13. "Lately I think about having sexual contact with someone other than my partner." That assumes she's had sex. Number 37. This is another invasion, and I consider it an invasion, "When I'm with my family I feel I'm an outsider." Number 42. "I am currently satisfied with my sex life." Number 45. "I currently feel that I would not choose the same romantic partner if I had it to do all over again." Number 52. "The thought of touching a corpse does not bother me." Totally inappropriate. 193 61. "My romantic partner and I do not have enough interests in common." 102. "Sex doesn't interest me as much as it used to." 109. "My partner is very sensitive to my sexual needs and desires." 117. "My parents tried to control my life too much."

I really found this very repulsive. If you pass the parent and Pupil Protection Act, you can eliminate this type of degrading and inappropriate testing and treatment. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Trail) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, thank you. You're not Heather, are you? MS. TRAIL: No. Heather had a big test today. She was going to come but she had a large test and I said, well — this is my younger daughter, Wendy. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Wendy. Okay. Questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Trail) Q. Kay, they're not still giving this mind test, are they? A. (indicating in the affirmative.) 19 4

Q. They are still giving this mind test?

A. Um-hum. When I questioned them, okay—

Q. I have questioned them.

A. When my daughter came home and told me about

this test, and she was very upset. I said, "All right,

I'm going to call the school and I'll ask for a copy of

it and I'll see what actually happened." The school

said, "Well, we'll get back to you in a couple of days."

And I said, "No, I need to see a copy of the test within

two days. Not i don't want you to get back to me."

Q. That was last year?

A. Yeah. And then I called the Superintendent and I finally got a copy, and with the copy came this little note at the top and it said, "We instructed your daughter if they didn't want to answer questions about

sexuality she didn't have to." When I questioned Heather she said, "They never said that, Mother." So they lied.

Q. And they're still giving this test?

A. Yes. This is still part of, you know, but they're saying now — now they're saying you don't have to answer the sexuality questions, but the whole thing is inappropriate.

Q. Kay, are they giving this to all, what, eighth graders?

A. No, this is 10th and 11th grade. 195 Q. Okay. Are they giving it to everybody or just in the health course? A. in the health course. Q. As part of the health course? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know what they do with it? A. I have no idea what they do with it. Q. I mean, you know, I think that's rather important. Usually tests you give for some kind of a reason, you know. A. I have no idea what they're doing with it. Q. Do you know of any other school that gives this in Chester County? I don't. A. No. Q. And who have you spoken to? You've spoken to the Superintendent? A. I called the Superintendent and the principal.

Q. Mr. Wingart? A. Wingart. And I really feel we need this Parent and Pupil Protection Act to protect against this type of testing . REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: I have no further comments. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Just a couple quick 196 questions.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Trail) Q. I agree with your comments about the test. I've got sons who are 15 and 16 and it would be strange for them to be asked to complete that kind of test, although I've seen the test before. Do you think that if we prohibited school districts from asking those kinds of questions, and pick any questions on there that you choose to find objectionable, do you think that that principle is so fundamental that we ought to prohibit nonpublic schools, private schools, from administering similar testing instruments?

A. Oh, yes. Oh, yes. Q. So this doesn't just apply to the public school sector? A. No. No. Q. There's some debate about the purpose and the implications of the section of law which tries to deal with this kind of — section of the proposed law that tries to deal with this kind of legislation and that's the protection of pupil rights. Now, again, I spoke, you were in the room two minutes ago when I spoke about balancing. I think we've got a general interest in trying to ensure that those kinds of objectionable 197 questions are not asked, but as a parent, do you also understand that we would riot want to write language and approve language into law that would make it more difficult — the lady has left now, the school psychologist who was here earlier this morning, to do her job in pursuing suspected cases of child abuse, something that indeed would be very embarrassing to the family? A. All right, this is totally inappropriate and you said in your bill that there would be limited testing. So you're giving yourself an out. Q. I'm not sure where it says limited testing. A. Okay, in the form that I have— Q. The summary you have. A. Yes. Q. That may be somebody's generous interpretation of the language of the bill. A. It says with limited exceptions, and I felt that, you know, this was totally appropriate for what we need. You know, this kind of testing is really inappropr iate. Q. But you don't — I understand what you find inappropriate and I agree with you. You don't have an objection to us also protecting the ability of a school psychologist or school nurse to work with a student and to ask the kinds of questions, maybe administer the kind 198 of tests, that is in pursuit of their responsibilities or consistent with their responsibilities to determine if in fact there is grounds for a child abuse case? The concern that we discussed earlier today about this section is that schools and school personnel have an obligation to report suspected cases of child abuse. A. Yes, and I have. Q. And, you know, I wouldn't want a school nurse or a school psychologist running out and reporting to you, me, Elinor or every parent in this room just every time that there is even a remote possibility. I would expect that they would exercise discretion. A. You exercise extreme caution because I was in a case where I reported child abuse and it was extreme caution that I used and it was observation over a period of time, it was the way a child reacts, and then you are not actually giving them a test. They do not need to be tested. You report it to an agency, the agency then takes their step and goes out and counsels with the parents and the child. This is not in the school. Q. No, we're talking about intermediate steps where the testing or the examination might be an oral. It doesn't need to be a written instrument. It might be a school nurse or a psychologist talking to the student. 199 It might in fact elicit information which is embarrassing to the family. If the youngster is a victim of sexual abuse at home or somewhere else in the neighborhood, it might indeed elicit information about sexual behavior. I spoke earlier about trying to find a balance, and that's what we're trying to do, to protect them.

A. Okay, what are you saying to me then as far as your bill is concerned? Are you saying you don't want to see your bill passed? Q. No. I'm asking you whether you understand that there is a need for this balance or whether you want to, even at the risk of making it impossible for a school psychologist to pursue cases of suspected child abuse or sexual abuse, even at the risk of making it possible for them to do that, where you blanketly endorse the— A. They do not have to pursue it. They can observe, they can see what's happening. They can report it. That's the way it should be done. Q. Okay. So you prefer the language exactly as it is now? A. Yes. Q. Okay. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Just one more. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Taylor. 200

BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Trail) Q. Kay, just help me understand, and I asked this before, why in an eighth grade class where they had 20 in a class or 12, or I don't know how many they have to have there, why if they understand that this is being done, why can't every parent opt their kid out? Why isn't that done? I have difficulty with that, and maybe you do too, but it seems to me that that's a way of really sending a message. You know, you don't even have to be a professional or any kind of a genius to read this crap and understand that, you know, you don't want your child subjected to this. So why don't we have all of the kids opting out of that sex education?

A. I wish that would happen. I truly do. I think what they're feeling is so much pressure, peer pressure. Q. If everybody does that? A. Well, if everybody went it would be wonderful, it really would, and I think parents need to get together and do that. They need to get a stronger bond, say to each other, yes, we don't want our child discriminated against and if enough of us will opt out, our child won't be discriminated. Right now, if Wendy opts out, and she probably will in the sixth grade again, that she'll be put in a hallway. You know, that's where 201 she's going to be put. She opted out, during that time period she can sit out in the hallway and work on something. isn't that wonderful? "Oh, what are you doing out in the hallway? Have you been punished?" Q. Well, I think, you know, I hope you accept the challenge and I hope that when I come and walk through the hallway of the Downingtown School District I hope I will see all 30 or 12 or 10, or how many they teach in a class these days, I hope I will see them all sitting in the classroom, and I throw that out to you as a challenge. A. And you're right. You're absolutely right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Do you want to see them all sitting in the classroom or out in the hallway? Representative TAYLOR: No, out in the hallway. CHAIRMAN COWELL: All opting out. MS. TRAIL: We'll have the whole hallway filled with children. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: That would be good, wouldn't it, Wendy? MS. TRAIL: Then you could have a party out there. WOMAN IN THE AUDIENCE: Could I just say one thing? 202 CHAIRMAN COWELL: No, you cannot. I'm sorry. This is not audience participation time. Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Wendy, thank you for being here. Our next witness is Elizabeth Stubblebine, from West Chester. MS. STUBBLEBINE: Hello. My name is Elizabeth Stubblebine. I have six children. I have to say that because we've heard eight and five, so I have six that range from age 3 to 17. So anyhow, I'm from the Downing town School District. You're probably tired of hearing about Downingtown, but I am here today to share with you some of my personal experiences. Because I endured no form of protection or respect from our school board or administrators, I very much support Bill 2277. I do feel as parents we have the right to be treated as full and equal participants in every step in planning for our children's future.

Winter of 1986-87 sex education was implemented into our Downingtown schools. The sex education program that was chosen by our administrators and school board was a direct result of using the now recalled 1984 State Education Guide as a reference. My 203 instincts as a mother, after studying the program, Values and Choices, were that it would give my 13-year-old daughter a distorted and commercialized view of human sexuality. I also felt the co-ed classes would be desensitizing and break down her self-esteem, thus bringing sex education down to an animal level for her. With much despair, my husband and I decided to withhold our daughter from the program. Our daughter took offense without our decision and resented us for treating her like a baby. After giving the situation careful consideration, we decided to allow our daughter to attend the parent workshops. Our design was to expose Julie to such a very delicate matter with the accompaniment of a loving parent. The ideas in Values and Choices were a direct conflict with our family's values. Because of experiencing no rights as a parent, I was forced to discuss homosexuality, incest, AIDS, masturbation, birth control, and sex with our virtuous young daughter. Julie's reaction after attending the workshops was disappointment and disgust. She, an intelligent human being, resented the implications that teenagers have no self-control. Also being placed in a i co-ed class and discussing private matters would be degrading . For the parents, the workshops were 204 exasperating. Serious concerns or questions when raised were never validated, only minimized. The health teachers that would be instructing our children in the classroom attended the workshops. The stipulation was they would not be expected to speak. How were we to decide whether or not the program would be appropriate for our child if we were not given the teacher's evaluation? Dr. Nie, who instructed the parent workshops, insisted on demonstrating and discussing the video on homosexuality. He was reminded at that point by a parent, myself, that this segment had been previously eliminated from the program by the school board. Even with this information, Dr. Nie persisted and requested a show of hands for approval or disapproval. He announced his motives were for personal use. I felt his actions were an inconsiderate waste of our time and a disservice to our tax dollars.

Upon completion of the workshops, our inquiries into the program were not fully satisfied. in school, Julie faced solitary separation from her fellow classmates. She was given "busy" work, then sent to the library without the guidance of a teacher or aide. For my daughter, this type of action was humiliating and a valueless use of her time. The news of Julie being opted out of sex ed was quick to travel around school. 205 Students, some a grade lower, were hasty in ridiculing her. The seclusion of my home was disrupted also because of obscene phone calls directed towards Julie containing Values and Choices material. The unit that was — I was hit in three different ages, so last year was really tough for us. I also had a fifth grader, so the unit that was taught to elementary grades was called Human Growth and Development, including sexuality. This involved my 10- year-old daughter. I felt the workshops we were given were evasive. To the amazement of the parents, we were demonstrated six weeks of material for grades 4, 5, and 6 together in one evening. This left time in the classroom for a large amount of unknown discussion. Many parents at the workshops revealed stress. They were under their own form of peer pressure. The choice was either allowing their children to participate or suffer the consequences. Repeatedly, parents communicated concern over co-ed classes. This meant the children would be discussing wet dreams, menstruation and private body parts together. After just completing a nightmarish experience with my eighth grader, I was appalled by the false promise of Mr. P. Jones, Assistant Superintendent. His acclamation was, "He would protect our children." 206

I'm sorry to debate his enthusiasm. Mr. Jones' idea of protection was allowing our children to be desensitized or ostracized. I believe America was built on an educational system that was beneficial to the psychological well-being of our children. There were no workshops scheduled for the 11th grade parents. We reviewed the curriculum upon request in the school library. We also interviewed the health teachers. The Alligator River story, which we all know, I'm sure, was one of the discussions in the teachers' workbooks. The dilemma I faced as a parent increased. I was asked by the teacher to entrust the formation of my teenager's well-being and moral attitudes to them. I feel this is a parent's privilege and responsibility.

The reason in which I am motivated to speak today is not to demean or attack the credibility of Downing town's School Board, administrators, or educators. My intention is to inform you of the disturbance my entire family suffered. Because of feelings of desperate helplessness, I turn to you for your approval of the bill. Sex education is a powerful subject which will mold and shape our young adults' morals and values of tomorrow. Its great importance should not be dismissed as another academic subject. The final design of this 207 bill will promote an atmosphere of openness, communication, and cooperation between parents and educators. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Taylor? BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Stubblebine) Q. When we change the system from opting in to opting out, how do you perceive the numbers then? Right now we're looking at one or two children being opted out. When you look at it being an opted in, what's your perception?

A. Well, I can only go by what I saw at the workshops with the parents and their reaction. Now, as I said, for juniors there wasn't any workshops. I really can't speak for other parents. But for the eighth graders, I would say — see, parents today aren't willing to speak about it in the open so a lot of parents are a little apprehensive, but the ones that did express disapproval, I would say maybe it was a third. But they also admitted that they were under a severe form of peer pressure and that if they didn't allow their children to attend the sex education, then their child was going to suffer. So the parents were under the same form of peer pressure. And in the elementary grades, I have to say — I would say maybe 90 percent of the people that night 208 begged to have their children taken — not have it co-ed. They pleaded, and Mr. Jones would not budge. And he really didn't even have any statistics to back it up. He just said that it would be better for the children. Q. I don't think the bill speaks to the composition of the classes. I do wonder, you know, if they're having such intimidation opting out, I hope that, you know, it's not perceived to be the same way if you opt in. A. Yes, I agree.

Q. The pressure will still be there for the parents, the pressure will still be there for the student, but probably not — I want to hear what you have to say about it. A. Well, I'm really not sure. I'm not an educator, I am a mother. I educate my children but I'm not a professional educator. And I really don't know. There would have to be a smoother way of splitting the sex education class in half, say that the children's parents decide to take them out. If it isn't mandated, I think at that point if they get to choose between history and sex, I'm sure most parents would choose history. Q. Well, at least there would be a viable alternative. A. Right. We had no idea what our children were 209 even going to be doing in the library until that day my daughter called me from school to tell me, and I think Jill's was on Louis Pasteur, which she had already studied. It's just babysitting time. And that's another thing. At West Bradford they placed them in the library in a side room, four children, no teachers, no supervision at all, and Jill was really upset because even this little trivial task that she was told to do she was upset because some of the other children were misbehaving and she couldn't even get that work done. So for her it was very hard.

And also, she reported to me that some of her very best friends would come crying to her, please have your mom call my mom. I don't want to take the sex education class. But the parents were afraid to opt their children out because of the ridicule and the criticism that they would get. Q. Thank you. A. Okay. Thank you. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Stubblebine) Q. You've been involved with this issue since when, personally? A. Last winter is when it started in Downingtown. That was the first time I had even heard about it. 210 Q. Last winter? A. Yeah. Um-hum. Well, that's the first time it came into Downingtown was last winter. Q. Okay, the winter of '86-'87? A. Yes. Q. How many members of the Downingtown School Board were thrown out of office during the 1987 school board elections? A. I honestly don't know. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: One. MS. STUBBLEBINE: I know there's been three new members since spring. I don't know. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. MS. STUBBLEBINE: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thanks for being here. MS. STUBBLEBINE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Nicholas Panagoplos, who is a member of and represents, for today's testimony, the Pennsylvania State Board of Education. Nick. MR. PANAGOPLOS: This is Margaret Hurlbert, who is also a member of the Pennsylvania state Board of Education and a member of the penn Delco School Board. Representative Cowell, members of the House 211 Education Committee, good morning. I am Nicholas panagoplos— CHAIRMAN COWELL: It's afternoon. MR. PANAGOPLOS: A little after noon. I'm sticking to my testimony. I'm a member of the State Board of Education and I am here today to present testimony on behalf of the Board. I am also an Administrative Assistant to the Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum for the School District of Philadelphia, and a former board member in Upper Darby. The State Board of Education, over its 25- year history, has dealt consistently with the subject of sex education. First, in the 1960s and '70s when it developed and amended its policy Statement on Sex Education, and more recently in developing AIDS education regulations. On behalf of the board, I am pleased to be here with you to share our thoughts regarding sex education and our concerns about House Bill 2277. You should know that the board voted at our September 15th meeting to oppose House Bill 2277 as currently drafted and to present this testimony. In adopting and amending the Pennsylvania School Code, the State legislature, in its wisdom, has left many educational matters to the discretion of the 212 local school districts and their citizens. The State Board believes that to be a sound precedent. We further believe that House Bill 2277 runs contrary to that precedent and may in fact hamper efforts on the part of local educators to provide appropriate programs specifically designed to meet the needs of their students.

Many of you will recall that during the development of regulations on AIDS education, the board worked hand-in-hand with legislators, other State and national agencies, and representatives of religious and educational organizations. We all heeded expert medical advice that AIDS education was imperative and, at the same time, we recognized that it was an extremely sensitive issue. Pennsylvania was among the leaders nationwide in developing AIDS education regulations. The board feels that is the way sex education programs should be developed — educators, clergy, parents and community leaders working in concert. In fact, that process is at the heart of our policy statement dating back to 1969. Section 5.10a of the board regulations on curriculum states, "A school district shall require written requests for excusals" from AIDS instruction when "this instruction conflicts with the religious beliefs or moral principles of the pupil or a parent or guardian of 213 the pupil." The board is opposed to the concept of requiring parents to sign forms opting their child into sex education programs. Section 2505-A of House Bill 2277 requires just that. Our concern rests with those students whose forms for one reason or another are likely never to reach home or never to be returned to school. Those students who would most benefit from a sex education program may be the very students whose forms are not returned to school. We should not deprive students of education they need through neglect or inadvertence.

The facts about the sexual activity of teenagers and about the nature of families today give rise to serious concerns about House Bill 2277's opt-in provision. in 1986, Louis Harris and Associates published the results of a nationwide survey of teenagers. They found that more than half of American teenagers say they have had sexual intercourse by age 17. Only one-third of sexually active teenagers regularly use contraceptives, and those teenagers with the fewest resources are those most likely to begin sexual activity earlier in life and those least likely to use contraceptives.

The board has identified as one of its priorities students at risk. We have addressed that 214 priority in terms of students who, for one reason or another, are at risk of failing to acquire the skills and credentials which are known to be associated with successful transition from high school to post-secondary education or the workforce. Our concern with respect to this issue rests with those students who are at risk because of lack of knowledge, understanding and moral value of being faced with the real possibility of teen pregnancy, AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases. In this light, we are also concerned about Section 2507-A of House Bill 2277. Many young people who are sexually active, especially the two-thirds who do not use contraceptives regularly, need information about the risks of their sexual activity and about preventing pregnancy and need encouragement to abstain from sexual activity; or, if they suspect they are pregnant, information about prenatal and neonatal care for their babies. While they should be able to get such information at home, the fact is that many of these young people have parents who are not informed themselves, or who are preoccupied with their own problems, or who in a

few cases are not sufficiently caring. Often these people turn to caring, responsible, knowledgeable adults - that is, teachers, school nurses, guidance counselors. Section 2507-A of House Bill 2277 would prohibit these 215 people from helping. We think the result would be some combination of the following three alternatives. First, school personnel will provide help and risk breaking.the law. Second, young people will get bad advice and misinformation from less knowledgeable adults or from their peers. Third, young people will obtain more abortions and give birth to more unhealthy babies. None of this makes any sense.

We believe that the board's Policy Statement on Sex Education developed and adopted by our predecessors in 1969 and amended in 1976 speaks to the issue of sex education in a most direct and logical manner, and we would ask your support of the board's policy. While its language may be somewhat outdated, its intent is more sound than ever. That is, to strongly encourage and support the local development of programs which provide a sound, thoughtful approach to this sensitive and extremely important issue, relying upon the wisdom of parents, clergy, physicians, and other community leaders. AIDS has brought us face-to-face with the cold reality that sex education is no longer just about teaching students about creating life but also about avoiding the possibility of death. 216 The State Board of Education urges you to take special consideration of our Policy Statement on Sex Education throughout your deliberations on House Bill 2277 and to join the board in our long-standing commitment to quality, sensitive sex education for our young people. I thank you for the opportunity to present our views and attach our policy statement that I made reference to. (See index for exhibits of Mr. Panagoplos.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Nick, thank you. Margaret, anything to add? MS. HURLBERT: No, I don't. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Let me just ask a couple of questions of a general nature. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Panagoplos) Q. To the best of your knowledge, has the state Board of Education at any time received complaints about sex education programs in any of the school districts of the Commonwealth? A. They have received a complaint about some literature that was distributed through the Department of Education, and that was probably the first time. Q. All of us discussed it and withdrew it and the Department withdrew it about a year ago. 217 A. That's correct. Q. Okay. And to the best of your knowledge, that's the only kind of complaint that's been purported to the State Board of Education? A. That is correct. Q. The State Board, with the cooperation of the legislature, and I've got to say I'm pleased that we worked well hand-in-hand together. The State Board initiated and finally promulgated the regulations dealing with AIDS instruction, and those are in place now. A. ' They are in place. Q. They're being implemented among all the 501 school districts. A. Yes. Q. Have there been any complaints about the procedures that were established in those regulations? A. We have received no complaints and as far as I know, everyone is complying with that regulation. Most of the news reports that I have read, the Philadelphia Inquirer, Delaware County, all the school districts have praised the regulation, were pleased that they were passed and were working hard to implement them. Q. And those regulations and procedures which provide for a dissemination of information to the parents and a right for parents to review the material and a 218 right for parents to opt out, you've had no complaints from parents about those procedures? MS. HURLBERT: very few, and I'd like to add from my own board experience and those from neighboring districts that very few parents have turned out to the meetings where they were to be shown the curriculum content and the tapes and videos and things. We've been surprised at the lack of attendance. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And that material is being reviewed and there is an opportunity for review? MS. HURLBERT: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And if I remember correctly, we added something in in committee and you graciously went along with that that gave parents even the right to take the material home and use it for home instruction if they chose to. MR. PANAGOPLOS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN COWELL: But you're saying the participation has been relatively minimal? MS. HURLBERT: Surprisingly so. MR. PANAGOPLOS: Right. And I can speak for the School District of Philadelphia that we do have a very good working committee that is comprised of members from all sectors of the community - the clergy, the business community, the home and school, okay, all the 219 public's interested in the education. CHAIRMAN COWELL: It strikes me that there are some sections of 2277 that are very controversial and there are other sections that speak to principles about which there really is no debate, and I worry that sometimes the proponents of 2277 get characterized as being against everything, which I don't think is the case. For instance, there is a principle in 2277 that speaks to emphasizing, not limiting but emphasizing, in the instruction the principle of abstinence as being preferable and there's language in it that speaks to it being the only sure way to avoid pregnancy.

MR. PANAGOPLOS: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: If I remember correctly, that fundamental principle really has enjoyed the support of the State Board, as evidenced in the language of the AIDS regulation, is that correct? MR. PANAGOPLOS: That's correct. And to my knowledge, I think most school districts are emphasizing abstinence first. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And the principle of information being made available to parents for their review, again there would seem to be little real debate about that. If I recall correctly, that principle was established in the AIDS regulations where the State Board 220 and the legislature together approved a requirement that school districts allow parents access to that information and the right to review. So there's not really anyone quarrelling with that reg, is that correct? MR. PANAGOPLOS: No, there is not. That's correct. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. I'm running out of people up here, but are there any other questions from staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: We thank you very much for your testimony. MR. PANAGOPLOS: Okay. Thank you. MS. HURLBERT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I want to apologize to those who are here for their afternoon testimony. I'm going to cause you some further delay. We are well behind schedule. We're going to try to move things along and have a very abbreviated lunch time. Instead of taking an hour for lunch we will take the next 29 minutes. We will call this meeting to order at 2:10. (Whereupon, a recess was taken at 1:42 p.m. The hearing was resumed at 2:30 p.m.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our first scheduled witness for the afternoon session is Renee Brody, who I 221 understand is going to not offer testimony but was to introduce two other individuals, James Roberts and Dr. Louis Van De Beek. MR. ROBERTS: My name is James Roberts. I am the Education Program Supervisor of the AIDS Activities Coordinating Office of the Philadelphia Department of Health. My concern is saving lives, and therefore I appear in opposition to Bill 2277. As it is written, House Bill 2277 would effectively inhibit public school officials across this State from teaching young people how to protect themselves from the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, the virus that can cause AIDS. For AIDS prevention education can only be done well in an atmosphere where there is frank, open discussion between students and health educators. Future generations can only condemn us in this year, 1988, if we fail to do everything that is in our power to provide our sons and daughters with information and options they need to protect themselves. The proposed Parent and pupil Protection Act seeks to protect Pennsylvania's youngsters from a reality with which they are already familiar. This act cannot protect them from vivid depictions of sexual activity in movies and videos, it cannot protect them from images in music and on television which make sexual activity seem 222 so appealing, nor can it protect them from the influence of their peers, who are sexually active in increasing numbers, many by the ages of 10 to 12, and 57 percent by the age of 17. Yet only one of three of them consistently use contraception. And we cannot forget that among our sons, 17 percent have engaged in homosexual activity at least once by the age of 19, and this is according to the Centers of Disease Control.

Finally, House Bill 2277 cannot protect our children from their own adolescent bodies and minds, which are ripe with hormones or from their own youthful urge to experiment, to take risks, and to rebel against their parents and teachers. House Bill 2277 would, in effect, protect our children from learning how to sort out the confused messages. It could keep them from education that would help them separate the fact from the fiction. We could not teach them the skills they need to resist peer pressure and the dangers of exploitation by adults and help them think critically and choose carefully from the very different values they are learning from the media, from their peer culture, their families and their religious training. Several major studies have shown that despite common fears, sex education does not increase sexual activity in adolescents. In fact, it may 223 reduce the risk of teenage pregnancy. And three of the factors which are most statistically with early sexual activity are having parents with low level of education, living in poverty, and being Black. This Parent and Pupil Protection Act cannot change those conditions.

This House Bill seeks to encourage parent involvement in sex education, which is admirable, but it is unfortunate that this bill would make it easier for parents to keep their children out of sexuality education classes than to allow them in. A recent Louis Harris poll showed that one out of three American teenagers has never talked with his or her parents about sexuality. And in so many cases, these parents are young adults themselves who became parents when they were teenagers and who in many cases had little opportunity to learn about sexuality since they became parents. Parents, too, need sex education. They need help in learning how to talk with their children about sexuality, and how to share the values which are important to them. Our adolescents today face risks we never faced when we were their age. Not only are sexually transmitted diseases like gonorrhea and chlamydia at epidemic proportions never seen before, and are more likely to affect young sexually active teenagers than 224 adults over 18, but we now have a new sexually transmitted disease, and this one is deadly. We know that one out of five people diagnosed with AIDS is between 20 and 29 years of age. Fewer are in their teens, yet because the incubation period for AIDS can be 10 years or maybe longer, we know that many of the people who have gotten sick in their 20s became infected as teenagers. The incubation period can also be as short as six months. This means that increasingly, we will be seeing our teenagers get sick. In Philadelphia alone, as of this month, 9 adolescents and 250 young adults in their 20s have been diagnosed with full-blown AIDS. Although these numbers may seem small, they represent only a tip of the iceberg and are not indicative of those already infected with the virus; persons who without essential education will continue to infect other people both in their group and in other groups. Yet, a recent study of Connecticut high school students revealed that 58 percent did not know that a person who has no symptoms can still carry the AIDS virus. A California study found that Black and Latino youth, who are at greater risk statistically than are White youth, are less likely than Whites to understand how AIDS can be prevented. 225 Now, while it is true that abstinence from sex and drugs is virtually guaranteed to protect us from AIDS, we cannot teach abstinence by preaching abstinence. Our children need to know how we respect and value them enough to teach them how to save their own lives. In closing, we are at war with this epidemic. Right now, we're not even close to winning. There's no vaccine, there's no cure. All we have is prevention through education, and if we fail to educate fully and properly, then we are on the side of this most hateful of diseases - AIDS. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. Doctor? DR. VAN DE BEEK: Thank you. My name is Dr. Louis van de Beek and I come to you today in my capacity as Director of Medical Affairs, policy and planning for the Philadelphia Department of Public Health in the AIDS Activities Coordinating Office. I noted that of those who have testified so far, I am the only physician to appear today, and I think that's particularly appropriate when we consider exactly what we're talking about when we talk about the AIDS epidemic and the relationship of the medical community to the education community. AIDS is the number one public health crisis 226 of our time, with over 1,000 persons in Philadelphia having already been diagnosed with this disease. AIDS has already killed more Philadelphians than the entire Vietnam War. The most difficult fact which we must come to grips with is that over 40,000 Philadelphians are already infected with the virus which causes AIDS, and this means that the vast majority of them will ultimately develop and die from Acquired immune Deficiency Syndrome. Faced with an epidemic of such devastating proportions, we must look for hope where we can find it, but we must also create hope where none exists.

Typically, when confronted with a disease of such a devastating nature, we place our hope in the medical community. While AIDS is no longer a medical mystery — after all, we do know what causes this disease, and even more importantly, we know how to prevent this disease, there is little hope that a vaccine will become available anytime in the near future. Treatments are being developed, but even the most promising of these serve only to prolong the lives of people who will ultimately know a horrible death which typically will occur at a very young age. Yet, those of us who have watched as hundreds of young people have died from AIDS must daily live with the knowledge that they will be followed by thousands upon thousands more. This 227 is the inevitable future of AIDS. However, as has been the case with other devastating crises faced by our nation, the AIDS epidemic does present several opportunities. I sit before you prepared to describe a manner in which together we can respond in a fashion that will save thousands, if not millions, of young people's lives. My very presence here symbolizes the dilemma which the medical community finds itself in relative to combating AIDS. Our opportunity to save lives is not based upon the existence of any vaccine or any medication, but is based solely upon our ability to educate people about how to protect themselves from becoming infected with the Human Immunodeficiency virus. And therein lies the hope. The spread of AIDS can be stopped, and it is our ability to communicate openly and frankly with our children in our roles as parents, health care providers and educators which can give every individual the opportunity to protect his or her own life.

Educators are thus placed in the unenviable position of having the responsibility for leading the fight against AIDS. I submit to you that their success or failure in leading that fight will translate into whether thousands live or die. To respond effectively, 228 our educators need our support in developing comprehensive curricula which pupils can relate to in a most personal manner. After|all, we are trying to influence behaviors, including sexual behaviors and drug abuse behaviors, which are both consensual in nature and perceived by young people as symbolizing independence from authority. Anything we do which decreases the credibility of the message which young people receive in their schools will in fact make those young people less reachable than they otherwise would be. The restrictions on sex education proposed by this legislation would do exactly that. The need to incorporate health promoting messages in educational curricula has never been greater. Let me briefly review some of the indicators which underline this need.

Between 1985 and 1987, reported cases of syphilis in the city of Philadelphia more than doubled. We have seen increases in every stage of syphilis being diagnosed in our citizens. Two-thirds of these cases are amongst young people. Syphilis is an epidemic, and it is young people who are its victims. I speak as a representative of the department which is charged with developing programs to care for young people with sexually transmitted diseases, and we are seeing more and more of them every day. 229 The incidence of gonorrhea in Philadelphia is the highest it has been in many years. Again, the majority of individuals infected by that sexually transmitted disease are young people. And don't think for a second that many of the people we are treating are not from the outlying areas, in fact, because of the fear of being identified as having a sexually transmitted disease, it is very likely, it is very likely that an adolescent from the surrounding area will come to our free clinics to receive care for those problems.

This year, if current trends continue, more teenagers will give birth in the city of Philadelphia than any time in recent history. This is true all across all racial groups. Of 27,000 births in the city of Philadelphia last year, 5,000 were amongst teenagers. For 1,300 of these teenagers, this was not their first child. In fact, 235 teenagers in Philadelphia last year gave birth to their third child. And while we as a society seem all too willing to accept these epidemics - the epidemics of syphilis, gonorrhea, the epidemic of teenage pregnancy - amongst our young people, we now know that the same behaviors that cause these problems will increasingly lead to transmission of a disease which will not result in a trip on the R-5 down to the clinic for a shot of penicillin and will not result in the birth of a 230 new member of the family, but will result in a painful and very horrible death. House Bill 2277 is a huge step in the wrong direction. It is ironic to me that this bill has been named the Parent and Pupil Protection Act. just what are we protecting parents from? What are we protecting pupils from? By imposing severe restrictions on education regarding reproductive health and family planning issues, we are inviting pain and suffering that is the inevitable result of uneducated, irresponsible sexual behavior. Lest we think by not talking about it it will somehow not occur, let's get something absolutely straight: The numbers I have just shared with you make it clear that the degree of sexual behavior amongst our young people has never been higher than it is today. It is simply beyond my understanding that we would somehow deem it appropriate to respond to this by refusing to address it. Indeed, as a medical practitioner, it is my feeling that we need to teach responsible sexual behavior the same way and with the same emphasis that we place on reading, writing and arithmetic. This legislation would place enormous barriers in the way of this essential part of any pupil's learning. In Section 2506-A, paragraph 6, this bill pretends to respect the relationship which exists between 231 physicians and patients. How then are we to reconcile the fact that, while paying lip service to the need for young people to have a protected relationship with a physician, we would somehow eliminate any discussion, any discussion whatsoever, regarding reproductive behavior from the physician-patient relationship if it happens to be occurring in the school environment? Again, when we consider what will happen if gonorrhea, if syphilis, if pregnancy go undiagnosed in our young people, even as all those things are occurring at unprecedented rates, it would seem to be not only wise but our duty as guardians of the public trust to assure that all sex conditions are promptly diagnosed and treated according to current medical standards. indeed, can we possibly imagine having denied the existence of polio in the 1940s and the 1950s? Would that have made polio go away? As you are aware, it was the critical involvement of our schools in administering the polio vaccine as soon as it became available that made it possible to control and eliminate that devastating illness.

I submit to you that the role of the schools is just as critical in the AIDS epidemic as it was in the polio epidemic. But we don't have a vaccine to dispense. No, in this case, the fight is a more difficult one because instead of sugar cubes we have to give our 232 children an education. Our failure to provide that education will result in a far greater tragedy than would have occurred had we somehow refused to place those lifesaving sugar cubes in the mouths of our pupils as soon as we understood how to prevent the spread of polio. And let me make something clear. That's exactly where we are on the AIDS epidemic. We know how to prevent it, and the prevention is education. We can only imagine with horror what would have resulted had we somehow enacted legislation prohibiting schools from becoming directly involved in stopping that epidemic. Ironically, we find ourselves considering a parallel measure in House Bill 2277. We must embark immediately on an alliance amongst educators and the medical community to stop AIDS. But stopping AIDS is not an isolated mission. Indeed, it is our ability to address the issues of syphilis, gonorrhea, teenage pregnancy, as well as drug abuse amongst our young people, that will dictate whether or not we are able to slow the progression of AIDS. May I offer a quiet prayer that God will grant all of us the courage that is going to be essential if we are going to address the task before us. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, gentlemen. 233 Questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Dr. van de Beek) Q. I certainly couldn't agree with you any more than you stated so eloquently and very emphatically our need to address the AIDS situation. We have done that, sir, as you are well aware. I don't know whether you're asking us to do more than we have done. We have, as the Education Committee, and we have in regs now the policy on AIDS for our public schools. House Bill 2277, as I see it, does nothing that says that we're going to put that regulation on the back burner. I see that as not affecting our AIDS policy whatsoever. If you could help me see how it does, I would be glad to listen. A. Yes. There are two points. Number one, let me make it clear. I think this bill is just putting out the wrong message relative to where we need to be going as a society to addressing sexual behavior amongst young people. Q. But not specifically the AIDS. A. But let me be also very specific now. In Section 2507-A, paragraph (d) on page 9, it's pretty clear here, line 23, "Any AIDS instruction provided pursuant to this subsection shall in all other respects 234 comply with the requirements of this article." it's my understanding that this means that indeed children are going to have to opt-in to AIDS education. Am I not correct? Q. You are not correct. The regulation, as I understand it now, is that the children must opt-out of the AIDS education and that it will have no effect whatsoever on them opting in.

A. Very well. I still present to you the issue that I think is a very, very serious one that again, by somehow treating reproductive related education issues differently we're sending out the wrong message. About that other issue, I just want to point out, if one reads the bill, I think that area then requires clarification, because by saying that any AIDS instruction provided shall in all other respects comply with the requirements of this article, a reading of the bill would seem to me that you would tend to apply the standard elaborated in an earlier paragraph relative to the written note being required. So I would request that the language be clarified. A. yeah, okay, I think perhaps we can have a common agreement on that. Let me ask you, you posed for the committee some very severe statistics as to what's going on as far 235 as sexually transmitted diseases and some of teenage pregnancy, et cetera. At the current moment there is a sex education program in the Philadelphia schools, is that correct? A. it is my understanding that there is a sex education program and that we're working very carefully with the school district to enhance that program. That's correct.

Q. So therefore what you have told me, as a member of this committee, is that whatever is out there now is not working very well, not very well at all. So, you know, your figures and your statistics are telling me that instead we have a program out there, be it whatever it is, wonderful or not so wonderful, but the results — we're not getting any results. We're getting more and more and more sadness in these areas, and so therefore the program isn't working. A. We're seeing more and more deaths, ma'am, more than sadness. I agree with you that the program needs to be tremendously enhanced. Absolutely. I think what we're talking about is direct— Q. So what we're doing now is — that's what you're saying in your testimony, what is being done now is not— 236 A. It is inadequate. That is correct. And I'm very concerned about moving in the wrong direction. Q. And how do you make it adequate? A. Personally, let me first of all say that I come to you as a physician dealing with public health problems in which I feel we need a partnership. I would ask James Roberts, who is a trained educator in that area, to respond to that specific question because clearly, our office has hired educators specifically trained in the area of development of curricula to address those issues. MR. ROBERTS: Well, first I'd like to describe to you some of the experiences I've had during education in the schools. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Mr. Roberts). Q. is it the Philadelphia schools? A. The Philadelphia school system. Whenever I go to a junior high school or a high school, believe me, the first value that I teach is abstinence. I tell the young people, if you're not having sex, if you're not shooting drugs, you don't have to worry about AIDS as long as you're not doing those things. And in fact, some young people will come up to me afterwards and say, well, I was going to have sex but I'm not going to do it now, or some might say that I've 237 been having it but I'm going to stop because I don't want to get AIDS. Q. And the bill advocates that. A. But invariably what happens is the moment I talk about abstinence, half of the class will laugh in my face. I have gone to sixth grade classes where the teachers will tell me the young people are already sexually active. I went to one high school here in Philadelphia where I talked to a classroom full of teenage mothers. There were girls 13 years old in that class having their second baby, and these girls had no idea what the sex act was about because nobody had taught them. So they couldn't even understand until after they had two children exactly why they got pregnant. I went to another high school and the young lady told me that she got pregnant on purpose because she wanted to get out of her mother's house, and she knew the welfare system well enough to know that for every baby she's got she'll get a welfare check, not realizing that the person she had dealt with was also a drug dealer, and because he was a drug dealer he was probably a drug user, which means that she probably put herself at risk for AIDS only because she wanted a baby to get out of her mother's house. Q. When you go to the schools in Philadelphia, 238 do you go in as a visiting teacher to make a presentation? A. We only go into the schools when we're invited by the principal. Q. It kind of reminds me of, you know, going back a few decades when we used to invite the school nurse in to teach this subject or we invited the family physician in. That isn't a very good way to educate our children either in this program and I'm sure you're not advocating that.

A. I don't understand your point. Q. Well, I don't see much education along the lines of AIDS or sex education by having a one-shot deal of you coming in and teaching it. A. Well, i think one point that you're missing is that now in the Philadelphia school system it is mandatory at practically all grade levels to have AIDS education. Q. And you just come in to enhance that? A. Well, when I did go into the schools it was before that policy was enacted. Q. All right. All right. A. Now I still have the option of going into the school to clarify on the point of AIDS for teachers who are not comfortable in teaching AIDS. 239 Q. And that reinforces the point I was making to this gentleman and that is that even though they've had it in the public schools in Philadelphia, we are getting lousy results. A. Well, a lot of the results we're getting are from kids that don't go to school. The people most likely to have teenage pregnancy, to contract sexually transmitted diseases, are the ones who've dropped out. Q. So then we ought to be talking about something else other than this bill. A. We ought to be talking about education for kids in school and out of school. Not less education but more education. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: I don't want to debate the bill or the interpretation, but I raised this point earlier and I think you were not here. I tend to agree with the Doctor's interpretation. In fact, I said so earlier when there were other members here. Some proponents of the legislation said they did not disagree with my understanding of that. DR. VAN DE BEEK: My understanding. 240 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Section (d) is that it does say that nothing in the section will prohibit the State Board from requiring instruction to occur, but then at the end it does say that any AIDS instruction provided pursuant to the subsection shall in all other respects comply with the requirements of the article, and we interpret that to include the opt-in, rather than the opt-out. DR. VAN DE BEEK: Right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: So my judgment would be that you are probably correct, and I was not challenged when I used that interpretation in front of Mr. Freind and some others earlier.

DR. VAN DE BEEK: Thank you. That clarifies that for me, and hopefully for Representative Taylor as well. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Gentlemen, thank you for being here. DR. VAN DE BEEK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Nathalene Richardson, representing the Black Basic Education Council. 241

MS. RICHARDSON: Good afternoon. First, I would like to correct the name of our organization. It's the Pennsylvania Conference on Black Basic Education. I would like to say I welcome this opportunity to speak, and I would like to commend the House Education Committee for facing this very difficult and complex issue. I have one major concern with the bill, which is the title which is being used, parent and Pupil protection Act. I think we then set up sort of an adversarial kind of role with parents particularly in objecting to or critiquing and withdrawing children when the need is so great. I think that there's a different model that could be used and which is not used enough in the educational establishment. We set ourselves up as the educators and then we bring in parents to either advise or criticize.

I would like to see something as critical as this issue of sex education including all the problems which we have heard and the data on AIDS we just heard as a multi-disciplinary model in the school buildings at the building level with parents and teachers and doctors and mental health people working together over the content. Because what we are seeing is — we are seeing as the diseases and the proliferation of children having children, we are seeing that we do not have standards, we 242 do not have an understanding of our own bodies and with risk with disease, and we know that we have parents many times who do not understand the parts of their bodies so that they can deal with that and understand it. In the past, I'd say maybe 20 years ago, when Philadelphia had a pilot program with Dr. Hummel, we found teachers did not know how to refer to parts of the body with correct names and were embarrassed, and so they could not help children. And the education, you see, is a process that goes on, and we can't just always separate it into particular segments and say that this takes care of that, so that we need to look at a different model for effectuating what you're trying to do. I think the goal is good but I think we need to look at another structure. We're seeing kindergarten children with sex knowledge that they don't understand and we're seeing runaways from home from sex abuse.

So we have a real serious educational problem and I think it needs to be addressed. I think the clarification of what is sex education, we've had so many titles within the curriculum. I think all of these things are to be commended and to be helped by this bill, but I think we need to look at another way of implementation rather than having , say, parents have to review, they have to be informed, you can take your child 243 out. Let's see how to make the education of children work. And when we want to have abstinence, we're going to have abstinence because it is a process of growth within children and within ourselves as the educators, as the common learners in this process that we're dealing with, because it is a very serious kind of thing. I think our organization has always tried to stand for what is going to be best for all children in the Commonwealth and not just for Philadelphia or Pittsburgh or whatever. And as I said, the nature of the problem, we can highlight AIDS, we can highlight unmarried parents, we can highlight many things in this. We can highlight things we don't want our children to know. The parents say, well, they should know it, but the media, the literature is here circulating everywhere and it's accessible to children on all levels, in all communities.

I think that's it. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there any questions? REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: I'd just like to comment that I think that your testimony is a very thoughtful one. it shows that you're passing onto this committee some of the judgments from your own career, your own experience, and I'd like to go on record as 244 appreciating those comments. MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, thank you very much. Our next witness is Pat Lang, member of the Board of School Directors of the Greater valley School District. MS. LANG: First, let me say it is Great Valley School District rather than Greater valley School District. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And you want to be greatest? MS. LANG: Greatest is what we want to be, right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Go ahead. MS. LANG: I am pat Lang. I am a member of the Great valley School Board. I am also a member of the PSBA Executive Board representing the suburban Philadelphia region, and I am here to speak in opposition to House Bill 2277 as it is currently written. Philosophically, I am sure we are all in agreement that parents should be involved in their children's education. I would also agree that the best place for sex education is in the home and in the church. Unfortunately, I think in this day with self-concerned parents, children too often do not have adequate quality 245 time with parents and thus much of sex education is done by their peers rather than being by the parents. I think school districts took on this responsibility because it was the community's desire to do so. The current system and safeguards in Pennsylvania we feel are working. School is the place where certain information can be imparted to the majority of the children most efficiently. I think you realized this when you mandated the AIDS instruction last year, but I don't see how you can discuss the whole AIDS question unless you discuss sex education. As U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop told the 92nd Annual PTA Convention, quote, "I am deeply saddened that we must explain human sexuality...so that they do not contract the fatal disease, but we must," end quote. You can encourage abstinence but you cannot mandate it, and we must face the reality of adolescents today and recognize that many of our children are sexually active. They need facts to protect them, and society, from a lifetime of heartache. We recognize that the sex education guidelines produced by the Department of Education created much discussion and probably motivated the introduction of this bill. It is our feeling that rarely, if ever, were these guidelines ever used, at least in toto. Constraining the Pennsylvania Department 246 of Education from producing such guidelines again does not seem to be sufficient reason to enact the many troublesome provisions of this bill, and I'd like to elaborate on several sections. Board approval for sex education instruction and parental notice. Current law and regulations already mandate board approval of textbooks and courses of study. Our board uses a five-year curriculum revision cycle and therefore is re-evaluating several sections of our curriculum yearly. These can be as long as several hundred pages. The entire board is given this for review, and most of us spend many hours looking at various curriculum. in creating this curriculum, we do an initial needs assessment which is distributed to the community, to teachers, and to students. A committee reviews this as well as the current literature on the subject and develops the curriculum. Health is on our curriculum cycle for this year and the committee this year will include parents as well as board membmers. The public is free to ask questions or comment at any public board meeting, and when there is concern on any subject we set aside special time to discuss those issues. This bill has been brought up to our board on several occasions as part of the legislative report, and several of our parents have questioned the fact that this 247 bill only addresses adding sex education, not deleting any section of it, and they have found this bias quite objectionable. Curriculum and course materials are always available on request for parents* review. We are not trying to hide it from our parents. Specific course content is discussed at back-to-school nights. The vast majority of our parents approve of our curriculum, and therefore mailing out annual outlines could be a costly waste of both staff time and money. In our particular district, I foresee the time when we would end up sending out all of our curriculum outlines because more of our parents are concerned with language arts, math, and science than they are with our health curriculum. in a time when we are trying to hold the line on taxes, this is an unreasonable financial burden.

The section on prior written consent. We currently allow parents to sign their students out of the sex education program. Since the majority accept the current program, it seems unreasonable to establish new rules when the system works. Parents routinely are inundated with forms at the beginning of the school year and tend to ignore all of those forms, except the ones that the child brings home and says, "please sign this. I have to have it back into school tomorrow." To deny a 248 child an appropriate program because of the lack of interest of the parent is not fair to the child. it is not like giving permission for athletics or band, as has been suggested by many people. The students involved in athletics and band normally have parents who are very involved, and getting their permission is just a minor inconvenience. We know from past experiences in trying to get material back from parents that many parents will not respond. Often, these are the students that we are most concerned about because it is their parents that are not concerned about them and their activities. We have no problem with mandating the opportunity to opt-out of the program because of family beliefs. I think any person that goes to all of the effort to find out what the program includes is likely to make an informed choice.

Protection of pupil rights. The provisions in this bill seem to impede, if not prevent, diagnostic procedures for "thought to be handicapped students." The current wording also puts those required to report child abuse in a rather chilling position, and this is an issue that I have heard brought up a number of times because people are concerned that they will be violating the restrictions of this bill if they report what could be considered embarrassing. 249 I happen to work in the area of special

education and dealing with emotionally disturbed students and disruptive students and I find this section particularly troubling. I have attached some wording which someone else put together, it is not mine, but it does seem to address the major issues of concern in the area of special education. It still seems to leave the issue of counseling and crisis counseling up in the air, and I think we are very concerned with those at-risk children.

In terms of enforcement, we have some concerns. We unfortunately live in a litigious society and I hate to see a bill which puts school boards in a position of potential increased legal costs by inviting litigation from non-residents. I would urge you to consider changing the word "person" in the bill to "parent" to at least keep the concerns local. In conclusion, the Great valley Board feels this bill is unnecessary. Curriculum should be developed to meet local needs, not the needs of State or national groups. Sufficient pupil protection already exists and the vast majority of school districts are responsive to their local communities. After all, most of us are parents. With my particular board, we all have children, and they are all public school children, in areas where 250 school board directors are not responsive, the community has a ready remedy - the ballot box, or in our case, the computer punch card. School directors are elected to represent their local constituents on a local level and when they don't, the electorate should remove them. This is their ultimate power. Thank you for the opportunity to address this. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Are there questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Lang) Q. Pat, currently you have a sex education program for the Great valley? A. Yes. Q. in which grades? A. It is throughout the curriculum. We have a health curriculum. It does not include sex education at every level. Q. Which levels does it? A. We start in, I believe, it's the eighth grade, but we will be in the process of reevaluating that entire curriculum this year. Q. And do you feel that you had, in the development of that program locally, which I think is a 251 stand that many of us have espoused, do you feel that you gave your parents the opportunity for sufficient input? A. Well, this curriculum is a long-standing one. It has not been reviewed for some time. This is the first time it is actually going through our five-year cycle. I can't speak to what the board did at that point because frankly I wasn't on the board at the time that it was being considered. I know this time that there will be parental input and there will be parents on the committee. Q. Not just token but really opportunity for them to see the materials, to review them and to have a meaningful dialogue? Is that what you're telling me? A. They will be part of the committee developing the curriculum. in addition to that, of course, there will be opportunities for them to input onto the curriculum as well. I'm sure we will have public meetings, as they have had in many of our surrounding districts. Q. But I'm sure that as a member of the State Executive Committee that you would like to see an open dialogue always conducted between the school board and anyone in the community who wishes to express an opinion? A. Absolutely. Q. And now directly a question, does the State 252 Board of School Directors have any authority over those school boards which will not open up their meetings for public discussion? A. Other than the Sunshine Act they don't have any direct authority to do that, no. Q. Do you think they should? A. Well, I'm a very firm believer in school districts having local control, so I would hate to see any State organization involved in telling any group that they had to do something.

Q. Let me see, there was one other place here. I think it was — yes. I guess I'm not so sure about your concern with the special education child. A. I think our concern is in the particular wording the way it is written, because it seems to eliminate the opportunity of testing students. I don't think that's the intent. I think it was just in the way it was written. But it reads, "No school district shall require any pupil to submit to psychiatric examination, testing or treatment, or to psychological examination testing, or treatment, in which a purpose is to reveal information concerning:...," Some of them obviously do not have to be there, but in this particular case "mental and psychological problems potentially embarrassing to the student or family" are questions that are asked by 253 our consulting psychiatrist. He needs some of this information in order to determine whether a child has an emotional disturbance. Q. But doesn't a child in the special education program always have what they call that special I.U.P.? A. Well, these are not students that are already identified. I'm talking about students that are thought to be handicapped and therefore are not yet identified, so they do not yet have an I.U.P. Q. And the other thing , I think the reason that we use the word "person" instead of "parent" is that oftentimes you have legal guardians and so if we just limit it to "parent" you really are narrowing down that portion. Thank you for your testimony. A. Can I just go back to your concern about — as I said, I think it was in the particular wording. in special education now, in order to do any testing, parents must give consent to have that testing done, and that seems to be sufficient remedy to protect both the parents' and the students' rights.

Q. But you and I both know that when parents don't give that consent we then, you know, go into court— A. Put pressure. 254 Q. —and we have a lot of pressure on that, and we could probably cite examples of that that happen every day. So, that's just an ongoing concern. A. Right. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Lang) Q. Pat, we haven't heard anything about the Great Valley School District from other witnesses, but I ask you to put on your PSBA hat for a minute. A. Okay. Q. Because we have heard about some school districts, and to date it appears that the great criticism has been about maybe a couple of districts, and I'm not going to, at this point, judge any of those districts one way or the other, but I really don't believe that parents who have come in with some stories have made up those tales. It seems to me that some parents have experienced some circumstances wherein at least in a couple of cases they've been shut out of the process, they've been denied the opportunity to speak at a meeting, the school board has ducked them, recessed when Elinor Taylor got up to make comments at her school board meeting , went into executive session without listening to her.

It seems to me that's not very smart, and it seems to me that it might be those kinds of actions in 255 even a couple of districts that invite this kind of legislation, even though 498 districts may be doing things perfectly well. And although you and I would agree that the Pennsylvania School Boards Association ought not be given any kind of power, I don't think they ought to be given any power to make districts do anything, but there may be a role for you to play as a statewide association in meeting such as the one that's going on up the street this week where you perhaps helped sensitized districts to what they ought to be doing, and maybe establish some models, maybe do some prodding on an informal basis.

I really think in the absence of that being done successfully, again the invitation is standing for this kind of legislation, or similar legislation, to be seriously considered by the legislature. That's usually why we end up with laws when maybe just a fraction of the folks out there, a fraction of the folks, create a problem and we end up imposing a law on everybody then. A. Right. Q. Which may not be the most appropriate answer, but sometimes it works that way. A. Well, I'm not in total opposition to the entire bill. As I said, you know, I think the concept of having parents involved is great. I mean, I became 256 involved originally as a parent in the school district because of those concerns. Q. And obviously, most districts are doing that. A. Right. Q. You know, we've heard probably just as many people testify, even proponents of the legislation come in and testify and say in their district the process has been responsive or in their district there has not been a problem, and I'm pleased to hear that. But it's equally clear that there are some problems in at least a couple of districts, and there may be similar situations statewide and there may then be a legitimate role of prodding and example setting that can be played by the PSBA.

A. Right. I certainly do not have a problem with going back to the Executive Board and suggesting that they try to come up with some model programs and perhaps get more information out to our members. Of course, we always run the problem of having school board members read all of the material they get. Sometimes you can give them all the information but if they don't take advantage of it, there's not too much that can be done. Q. We have a couple of legislators like that. A. They exist everywhere, right? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? 257 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for being here. MS. LANG: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Karen Smith, a school nurse in the West Chester School District. MS. SMITH: Good afternoon. My name is Karen Smith, and I am employed as both the school nurse and the Health Service Coordinator for the West Chester Area School District in West Chester, Pennsylvania, and I am pleased to have an opportunity to participate in the formal hearings related to House Bill 2277. One of the major health problems in the United States is teenage pregnancy. Over a million girls under the age of 19 become pregnant each year. This averages out to at least 1 in 10 teenage girls becoming pregnant. Among teenage mothers, more than 25 percent will become pregnant again within the first year after their first delivery. In 1986, the Select Committee to Investigate the problems of Teenage Pregnancies and Parenting in Pennsylvania found that most teenage pregnancies were unplanned. Virtually none under the age of 15 were planned pregnancies, and 87 percent of those between 15 and 17 were conceived unintentionally. 258 in 1984, Pennsylvania had 13,496 reported pregnancies for women under the age of 18. Chester County, in which my school district is located, had 367 reported pregnancies in women under the age of 18. This number places Chester County with those counties having a rate of 17.1 to 2.0 per 1,000 pregnancies in females 10 to 17 years of age.

In my school district, which has a population of approximately 10,000 students, there were 18 births to teenage mothers in 1985-86 school year, 12 births in the 1986-87 school year, and 17 births in the 1987-88 school year. There are no statistics available for those females who voluntarily terminated their pregnancies. I think that we would all agree that teenage pregnancy is a problem of great magnitude affecting the school age population. It is with this in mind that I address my remarks to House Bill 2277, Section 2507-A, Prohibited Health Services. Several times during the course of any given school year I encounter this situation: A female student comes to my health office and asks to speak to me in private, at which time she confides that she may be pregnant. The student is generally in a state of turmoil. She is dismayed and often asks, "How could this have happened to me?" Frequently, she is angry at 259 herself or her sex partner for not having taken precautions. She is frustrated and crying. "How can I deal with this? My parents will kill me," is a typical reaction. These intense emotions are normal for the teenager who suspects that she is pregnant. At this critical point in time, she needs to talk to a responsible adult and she needs assistance in organizing her plan of action.

Most girls who come to me have not received a pregnancy test and are only assuming that they are indeed pregnant. Many are so emotionally distraught that they are unable to proceed logically. They are unable to recognize that their symptoms may be caused by other medical conditions and that a test should be done to confirm whether or not this is a true pregnancy. These young women need someone in the school setting who can answer questions, give them reassurance, and direct them to the appropriate agencies or services that will best fit their present needs. I can certainly understand that the desired result of a girl's suspicion of pregnancy would be to approach her parents. However, there are many reasons why a student may not feel comfortable doing so. Perhaps she does not want to tell her parents until she knows that she is really pregnant and she is seeking pregnancy 260 testing information, perhaps she does not feel close to either parent or feels that she has disappointed them by getting pregnant. Often step-parents are involved and the relationships may be strained and/or lines of communication closed.

There are many variables that may affect the female's decision to first approach an objective professional in her school setting. it is perhaps less painful emotionally, perhaps just more convenient, or perhaps she feels that she will receive knowledgeable, nonjudgmental answers to her questions.

Today, educators and parents encourage students to ask questions, to be responsible in their actions, to be informed consumers. Yet, when it comes to making one of the most important decisions in a female's life, this bill intends to eliminate information that would otherwise be available through the school. If students are unable to receive pregnancy information from teachers, school nurses, guidance counselors, home and school visitors, and so on, and/or if they are uncomfortable going to their parents, they will most likely turn to their peer group for that information. The vital decisions that need to be made early in a pregnancy should be carefully thought out and should be based on factual information supplied by 261 responsible adults, not on what may be erroneous information passed from one teenager to another. We must keep in mind that we are dealing with young persons who do not necessarily know what services are available and/or the medical significance of receiving early prenatal care or early termination of a pregnancy. Adult, professional counseling is also important so as to prevent subsequent pregnancies.

It is not the school's intent to replace the student's parents or to bias a student's decision related to the pregnancy. School professionals only desire to offer assistance to the student by creating an awareness of those services and options available during the decisionmaking process. As a school nurse, I always encourage a student to do two things as soon as possible - receive pregnancy testing and inform the parents about the pregnancy. I want the student to include her parents in the decisionmaking process. I prefer that the guidance come from them, if possible, so the pregnancy decisions are mutually agreeable. However, if a student comes to me for assistance, I want to be available and allowed to talk with her. In closing , it is my recommendation that House Bill 2277 not become law. This bill would 262 eliminate my opportunity to be available to students who seek pregnancy information and/or need a caring, knowledgeable adult with whom to confer, ask questions, and receive information on which responsible decisions can be based.

I want to thank the members of the House Education Committee for presenting opportunity for interested individuals to present their viewpoints related to House Bill 2277. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Questions? Representative Taylor. BY REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: (Of Ms. Smith.) Q. First of all, I'm glad you're the school nurse in my school district because I like the information that you are giving the students once they come and talk to you on this problem. Do you feel that the two things that you encourage your students to do - to get pregnancy testing and to talk to their parents - could you with any degree of assurance say that that's what every school nurse would do? A. I think it's difficult for me to speak for every school nurse, obviously. I think if you asked a teacher to speak for all teachers they'd say— 263 Q. No, I don't want that, just I want your professional — I mean, you meet with the school nurses and you probably know how they handle the problem. Do they all handle it the same way? Maybe I should ask it that way, Karen. A. Thank you for changing it. I would say for the most part, these are the two things that would be encouraged by all school nurses. You want to establish the pregnancy because of your medical experience. You realize these girls can have an irregular period and so on because they're young, they're not fully mature at this point. A lot of girls come to you, they are going through their first sexual experiences and suddenly, as teenagers do, retroactively they think about they may be pregnant and they're panic-stricken. So naturally, for health reasons you want to establish whether this is a true pregnancy or not. I think any school nurse would encourage the student to go to their family, to their parent, to their guardian, whoever is their caretaker. Yes, I do feel that the school nurse would do that. Q. in your association, do you discuss this? Has this ever been a part of a workshop or of a presentation saying that — you know, I hear from my constituents where there are nurses who don't do what 264 you've said. A. Um-hum. Q. You know. I hear from parents that, you know, the school nurse becomes involved in giving other kinds of advice which is, "Well, why don't you go to the abortion clinic? It really isn't going to be that great of an experience." And I think that's what, you know, what we fear. I'm not sure maybe putting it in law would correct that situation necessarily, but do you discuss that in your professional groups? Do you discuss how to handle these situations, or is it more or less just what you do according to your values versus what Nurse C does according to her values?

A. I think a lot of it depends on the district, the policy of the district, whether or not they even want nurses to get involved in this. The two things that I have suggested in my statement, I think that is pretty universal, from what I have gathered in just attending nursing conferences. I myself have never — I've attended many seminars on teenage pregnancy, yes, but I have never attended a seminar where school nurses have actually sat down and discussed their role and their presentation within their district. I can't say personally I have done that, no. Q. Perhaps it would be interesting sometime to 265 see how your colleagues are handling that. REPRESENTATIVE TAYLOR: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Greg White. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Ms. Smith) Q. I'm a little confused and I would like you to elaborate a little bit on this. You stated that what you'd like to do is create an awareness for those types of services and options that are made available. I'm not sure that the bill necessarily precludes you from doing that, or says that you will be incurring penalties from doing what you have prescribed or said you would prefer be prescribed. A. The bill— Q. It says that you can't be involved in pregnancy testing. It doesn't say that you couldn't advise a person that they should get pregnancy testing. It says you couldn't cooperate in the actual testing process. I don't think it says you can't advise someone that they need professional medical help and that they should see someone who could provide that appropriate service. A. Well, it talks about, in sense of referral, it sounds, you know— Q. You couldn't refer them to a specific place, i.e., X Clinic because X Clinic operates in a certain 266 kind of manner. A. You're saying I couldn't according to the bill? Q. Yeah, could not refer them to a specific clinic, per sef but you could tell them that services for pregnancy testing are available at a clinic, but you couldn't say, you know, go to this one if it was a favored physician or clinic or something like that. A. So you're saying to me that I could give them the names of clinics that they possibly could get pregnancy— Q. Just say — well, I'm not sure you could give them the names of clinics, but you could say that clinics can provide this kind of service. A. But why would you make a statement— Q. Or a doctor could provide this kind of service. A. All right, but I could say to them, you could go to your family doctor. You maybe would be embarrassed about going to your family doctor so you could go to a doctor, and I do that, but by saying the clinics could do pregnancy testing, are you really supplying information to a student? They're sitting there saying, okay, well, what clinics? Now, I cannot say — I'm making up a name — the John Burns Clinic— 267 Q. I understand. A. —located on Gay Street. Q. I understand that. A. I could not do that, am I correct? Q. Well, yeah, probably not, from the way I read it. The question is— CHAIRMAN COWELL: What if she gave them a phone book? Would that be cooperating?

MS. SMITH: I don't know. You see, that's — I think the language— MR. WHITE: I don't think that that— MS. SMITH: I think the language is somewhat nebulous to the extent of how far can I go? And you have to remember, janey has come to Karen Smith, the school nurse, and she is saying to me, "Mrs. Smith, I want to — I think I'm pregnant." I say, "Well, let's get some pregnancy testing done and let's find out. Let's not be upset until we really know it's a true pregnancy." I don't want to leave the student hanging there. She's a little ninth grader, she's scared to death anyway, she's very upset, and she usually will say to me, "Where can I go? Where can I go for pregnancy testing?" At this point, i give her, you know, several suggestions - family doctor, a doctor the family doesn't know, community agencies. Wouldn't I be prevented from 268 doing that, under this bill? That's my concern. Q. Specific ones, yes. I think you probably would be. A. All right. But, you see, to a student who seeks information, to just say to them, "Clinics do

this," that's not very helpful to this student, it really isn't. They don't have enough experience to know where to go from there. Q. Okay, which will lead me to the second question. A hypothetical situation where a nurse takes a more active role in this, literally — some testimony the committee has received where the nurse has literally bypassed the parent and assisted with the students to obtain all kinds of services. If I remember correctly, one led to an abortion before the parents ever even knew about it. What kinds of protection could be written for parents if school officials would adopt a procedure and make references or recommendations which bypass now and then something happened and then a parent found out about it after the fact? You know, at some point a parent has the right to know what's happening with a minor child, but what do you do if the school personnel take a very active role and go beyond and just literally bypass a parent and it ends up in some kind of service which may even lead to an abortion or something else? 269 A. I can't speak to that because I've never done that and I really don't want to get into— Q. Well, what happens to the parent? I mean, the parent has no protection. A. All right, let me backtrack on this for you. You are aware a student can go to, and I'm giving an example, an abortion clinic without parental consent? You are aware of that? Q. Yeah. A. So, in essence, those services are available to the student whether or not the school personnel get involved. Q. That's true. A. A parent might find out retroactively about an abortion. I have had that experience in my school. I have been in situations with very distraught parents because they have found out after the fact. Q. But they haven't had it happen as a result of an action taken by a school official— A. But the only action— Q. —who in essence then knew that by giving this information to the student they would bypass the parent. A. But, you see, that's the difference that I see here. I do not see the school in a decisionmaking 270 role. I see the school in an information-providing role. Q. Well, there are ways people can give people information and help them make decisions very easily. It's done all the time, including in my business. A. But I can also — you know, you can argue that point and I can also say to you, does the student not have the right to the information available? you should not influence the student. I would never sit down, no matter what the situation, and tell a student what they should do. And I don't think that very many school nurses would, but I think that there is an obligation to supply information to a student, particularly if she asks directly for it, and a lot of students will. A lot of students will come right out and they will say, "Where can I get pregnancy testing?" I have had students say to me, "Where could I get an abortion if I decide that's what I want to do?"

Now, this bill would prevent me from giving that information. I would just have to say, "I don't know," or say, "I can't supply that information for you," which is probably professionally how I would handle it. I object to that. I feel that if a student asks me a question and she needs direction and I professionally can give her names of reputable medical facilities, that I should have the ability to do that. 271

Now, that's coming from my personal opinion. I do not feel that by giving her the names of agencies I am indeed saying, use these agencies. if she has asked me a question and I answer it, I feel I am providing her with professional information, but I'm certainly not saying to her, I think you should go to this place and you should have the abortion. I am merely giving her information.

Q. Well, this is one of the areas of the bill that deals with the day-to-day operations of school personnel and also concerns of the parents, and we've had a lot of criticism of it from school nurses and other people, and at the same time there is an obvious desire on the parts of the sponsors and other people to try and provide some kinds of things they don't like. I don't know if there's a middle ground and I'm just trying to walk through this process to see how it actually impacts on everybody involved, and that's why I want to ask those kinds of questions. MR. WHITE: Thank you. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Smith) Q. I was particularly interested in the circumstances you described on page 3 where you said several times during the course of a year you are encountered by a student who comes in and thinks that she 272 might be pregnant. I asked that — I've talked to school nurses previous to the hearings who have raised a concern similar to yours and I asked that question of a proponent of the legislation who testified last week, I said, "What should that school nurse tell this young woman in this case?" And she said, "She should tell her to talk to her mother." A. Um-hum. Q. You kind of alluded to that in your testimony about how practical that is in some circumstances. From a professional standpoint, would that be adequate for you to tell each and every one of these students who has come to you wondering if she's pregnant, worrying that she's pregnant, "Talk to your mother"? A. I alluded to it as a direction I give a student. I think that a student should always be encouraged to go to her family. That's a personal opinion. I feel the family is who should give you support. I alluded in my testimony to the fact I feel the decision should be joint decisions made by parents and students, if at all possible. I also alluded to the fact that we have a lot of fragmented families out there. It would be wonderful if in our school district we knew that all families were there for the students when they need them. I should say 273 at all times for the students. It's not just when they need them. Sometimes students don't realize when they need their families. But unfortunately, that's an idealistic situation and is not necessarily realism in this day and age. I, as a school nurse, I'll repeat my statement, I always encourage the student to go to their family and receive pregnancy testing. That happens to be the way I approach it, and I really think that that would be standard amongst most school nurses. Q. And as a matter of practice, do you find it necessary sometimes to help a young woman find a place for pregnancy testing? A. Yes. Um-hum. I have had that experience several times, yes, that they're questioning — they come to me and say, "Do you know for sure I'm pregnant?" They will give me symptoms and then I will say, "I really feel that you should have pregnancy testing, you know, how comfortable are you with going to your family?" We talk about that. I usually — my first suggestion is usually the family doctor because I feel like, especially if they can get their parents involved, I think that's where Mom or Dad would probably take them would be to the family doctor. There's also the home pregnancy tests now which is available to anybody that has the $15 to pay for it, 27 4 so pregnancy testing is not a big issue when you think about it's sold off the shelves of the drug store.

These students are sometimes erroneously informed, but they also get a lot of information from their peers, and some of the girls will say to me, "Well, I already did the home pregnancy test and that came out positive," so some of them have already done some pregnancy testing; some of them want more professional advice, you know, in determination of the pregnancy.

Q. As I read this section, even if a parent came to you with his or her daughter and wanted to discuss these things, including pregnancy testing, and I don't know the demographics of your school district but I've talked to school nurses from districts where there's maybe a high poverty factor and folks are more dependent upon clinics rather than family practitioners.

A. Right.

Q. Have there been circumstances where a parent and daughter will come to the school nurse and said, "Can you direct us to a place where we can find out if my daughter's pregnant?" A. Um-hum. Q. Have you had those kinds of circumstances where parents have actually come in?

A. Oh, yes, I have. 275 Q. And even in those circumstances where the parents are a partner in that discussion, my interpretation of this legislation is you still— A. Would be limited. Q. —couldn't talk about it or you couldn't give them any direct. A. Well, my interpretation, according to the way this is stated, is I would not be able to give them any names, addresses or suggestions as to where they could follow through with whatever they want to do - continue the pregnancy or terminate the pregnancy. That's my interpretation. I assume I'm interpreting it correctly. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony.

Our next witness is Cindy Sadler, from Downingtown, PA. MS. SADLER: Good afternoon. My name is Cindy Sadler. I'm from Downingtown Area School District, and I'm the mother of four children and was involved with the implementation of the Downingtown Area School District sex education program. But before I kind of start what I had prepared, I had revamped it a little bit listening to the little bit of testimony that I have. From what I heard, it sounds as though there's a sort of a schizophrenia 276 here, as though the p.A.P.P.A. bill and the sex education are mutually exclusive from each other and that sex education is needed in order to address social pressures. Now, I would agree that education is needed to address social pressures, but I would want to be a little more definitive in what we call sex education.

I think the p.A.P.P.A. bill just — sex education should be a multi-faceted thing involving the school administration, the school board, and parent. The parents are the primary educators of their children, and in the area of sexuality, they should have the first say. And I think that the politics of education, the school board and what not, have usurped some parental rights. Now, that's my own experience, you know, that I can list for you. And I think the p.A.P.P.A. legislation will simply fine tune the process of sex education including the parents. Okay? My particular experience started in September of 1986 when I, by chance, learned that an outline of the sex education curriculum would be presented at a school board meeting. I went to the school board meeting and it was not listed on the agenda as sex education. They went through the outline and I raised my hand and asked what resources would be used in the sex education material, and he replied to me, Mr. Jones, our Assistant 27 7 Superintendent, that the Pennsylvania Health Guidelines would be used. And I asked if I could get a copy of them from him, and he said, yes. I went in the next day and I asked for a copy of the outline and I asked for the curriculum guidelines, which he did give me, and I was refused a copy of the outline that was presented by the school board member. I insisted that this outline was made public at the previous night's board meeting and was public information, and it was here that I began to feel like an intruder into the process because I was repeatedly denied. But I just decided that I was going to copy the outline word for word, so that's what I did, and Mrs. Scalia and I did that together. MS. SCALIA: All 12 pages. MS. SADLER: All 12 pages of it. MS. SCALIA: Handwritten. MS. SADLER: Handwritten. And when Mr. Jones came out and saw that we were doing that, he said he'd rather us not do that. And I insisted, "This is public information, it was offered at the school board meeting, and I insist on having it." He asked me, Mr. Jones was lost for words when he discovered this and asked us not to circulate this outline to the general public because it was 278 tentative and the subject was too controversial. When we asked Mr. Marcocci why it wasn't listed, he's the president of our school board, on the agenda, he said the same thing - it was too controversial. Now, I spoke to a lot of parents between the September and October board meeting. I may have found, may have found, a handful of parents who had heard anything about it. The summer newsletter hadn't gotten even to the parents yet in September, and that's when it talked about the community task force.

I asked Mr. Jones why this curriculum was up for review, and he told me, well, they have a seven-year pattern and this one just was the year for that. But the last time the health curriculum was reviewed was 1982. 1982 and seven is 1989, okay, so that just wasn't true. He was three years early on the curriculum. Then I began my trips, many, many trips to libraries, and I just want to insert here, I'm rather furious about all this stuff because I've spent hundreds of dollars of my own money and many, many hours of a lot of research to find out the information that I've found that I could not get from him. I found the only resource listed in the outline, the vocabulary list — and this turned my stomach. Apparently, this book is a primer for the so-called experts, Education for Sexuality. Children 279 are reduced as the last link in a chain of animal families. Their sexuality is a base function and mechanical in nature. "Daddy's sperm is produced like a factory produces cars," that's for second graders — and "An orgasm is the thrill of a high dive," for eighth graders, "with several pleasurable plateaus in between." I still wasn't sure, maybe it's just me, maybe I've been out of touch raising my family, and I took this stuff to my obstetrician and I asked him to review it and give me his objective view of it, and here's the letter — now, I'm going to give this to you all typed up. I didn't get that done. "Dear Members of the Education Committee: "In September 1986, Mrs. Cynthia Sadler brought me the curriculum guide outline and references proposed for the Downing town Area School District. After careful review of these materials, it was my considered opinion that these materials were not in keeping with the current trends of sex education recommended by the American Academy of pediatrics and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, of which I have been a fellow since 1976. "I strongly urge members of this committee to adopt House Bill 2277 for the health and well-being of our young people." 280 Now, I know I'm going to be short on time so rather than — oh, let me say this, too. I called Planned parenthood. They volunteered to me, when I told them I was from Downing town Area School District, that they had helped the Downingtown Community Task Force to

prepare the outline, which — well, they volunteered that information to me, and they told me to call Mr. Jones. Okay?

Now, on the subject of the community task force, there was a doctor on that task force. He was on the Medical Advisory Board of Planned parenthood. There was one pastor in the Downingtown Ministerium. In our school district there are two mmisteriums, but only one of them was consulted, okay, for a pastor. There was one pastor, and he's on the board of planned Parenthood. He assured us he would have — I'm going ahead. We met with Mr. Jones shortly after that, a group of five of us, and Mr. Jones assured us that there would be no Planned parenthood involvement in any way, shape or form because if he did that he'd have to give equal time to the other side. And we would be able to review materials, definitely, absolutely, but we would not be able to participate in the actual process because the professionals had to do that and he didn't want them interfered with. But he would be sure we could review 281 the materials, and the scope and sequence of the curriculum would be available to us in April. He assured us of that. That never happened. Never— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Cindy, I've got to ask you to wrap it up. You've gone about eight minutes. MS. SADLER: Okay. Well, let me tell you this: As far as the curriculum review process, we got one week for the 11th grade curriculum, which was officially never approved by the school board. We were told it was K-8 and not the 11th grade curriculum. We had three weeks to preview the entire eighth grade curriculum. It was not available for parents outside of the working hours 9:00 to 5:00. There is inaccurate birth control information in it. We were denied resumes for the teacher who taught the workshop. There was no objective evaluation given, except for the doctor who was not an obstetric doctor. He's a doctor of sexuality. We were told there would be nothing of sexual information in under fourth grade, but the famous egg and sperm theory is in the second grade curriculum. There's a planned parenthood curriculum for — the entire elementary curriculum that we have for sex ed is from Planned parenthood. Let's see. Oh, there's so much. The resume of.the consultant that was hired, we brought in a 282 consultant after the community task force. Her name was Carol Flaherty Zonas. She used Planned parenthood for a springboard into the Department of Education. And just in closing, I would just have two thoughts for you. I suggest some further housecleaning in the Department of Education. A body of self- proclaimed experts who make millions of dollars on the sexuality of teens have set up housekeeping in the State Department of Education. It's giving workshops for the Board of Education and for the Executive Academy in Harrisburg for the administrators. Their curricula reflect the outdated trends of the '60's which succeeded in increased sexual activity, VD, and an increase in abortions. Such information undermines the health and well-being of my children. We should be looking to ACOG and the Academy of Pediatrics and to the parents, the primary educators of the children.

And one more thing. I just want to say this. Children will reject this vile intrusion into their intimate lives and also anyone who sanctions such an intrusion or such policy, whether they be called so- called educators or legislators. And there's a million more things. I can't sum it up in five minutes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I've got to ask you to stop because I've tried to accommodate everybody and I'm 28 3

feeling a bit abused right now, to tell you the truth.

MS. SADLER: Okay. Can I say one more thing?

CHAIRMAN COWELL: No. MS. SADLER: Just one more thing?

CHAIRMAN COWELL: No. I'm sorry.

MS. SADLER: Okay.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: You took 11 minutes, so you

used your 5 minutes. We're two hours behind schedule,

and some of the proponents of this legislation are not

here with us at this point.

Let me ask you a couple of questions.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Sadler)

Q. We've heard a good deal about the Downing town

School District and I have come to sense that some people didn't do things there as they might have, even used common sense in terms of information for parents and working with parents and making sure that accurate

information was made available to the community as a whole. We've heard about a couple of other districts, maybe not as much about them but similar to the kinds of problems expressed.

The question I have, coming from another end of the State, is why should the senior citizens in my school district have to pay higher taxes to pay for the costs that are inevitably going to be incurred with 284 mailings and what have you to solve a problem that I'm going to say for the moment clearly exists in your district in terms of lack of information, material not being disseminated, not being readily made available to parents? You know, why should that be the solution rather than you running for the school board, for instance?

MS. SCALIA: I'd like to answer that as a senior citizen, as you directed it as a senior citizen. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, have you testified before us before? MS. SCALIA: Excuse me? Would you repeat that? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Did you testify before us before? MS. SCALIA: No, sir. I have never testified. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Would you just identify yourself? Because you're not on the agenda. You're not on the agenda. MS. SCALIA: Well, I am on the agenda, on the early — if you look at your copy. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Where are you on the agenda? MS. SCALIA: I'm 11:10, and I'm listed as a 285 senior citizen.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Oh, and you chose not to be here at that point? Go ahead. MS. SCALIA: Yes, well that's why I chose to be here at this point. CHAIRMAN COWELL: You folks can moan, but we're cutting into the time of people who want to testify later on. So I'm trying to accommodate everybody, but I can be just as rude as others. Go ahead. MS. SCALIA: Well, I just want to tell you, sir, that the total costs of implementing the P.A.P.p.A. bill to the parents and to the senior citizen is 5 cents per child. And if you have 500 students in the sex education program, that is a total cost to the town, to the school system, of $25. As a senior citizen, I will pay that 5 cents gladly, as approving of the bill. MS. SADLER: Did you want my answer, too? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Do you have a response to it? MS. SADLER: There is just something that's very much missing in the process involved in implementing sex education curricula, and it would be a very good preventive measure. We're into preventive health, that's why we're having sex education, that these problems 286 wouldn't occur. And it's just a preventive measure that costs 5 cents per student. I don't see the — considering what's on the other end of the scale, these type of abuses and misinformation going out to children in the name of education and things coming into the school without any measures of parents can't see the books, parents can't review materials. This can happen anywhere, and Carol Flaherty Zonas has been everywhere over the State, and I can give you her resume. She is a special interest and does not belong in education. And I can tell you some of the things she said, too, you know, when I did meet with her. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Sadler)

Q. I don't know this person. Will you tell us who you're talking about? A. Okay. Carol Flaherty Zonas was hired by the Downingtown Area School District. She had given workshops for the School Board of Education, and she also had given workshops for the Executive Academy in Hamsburg of School Board Administrators. She's a consultant with the Department of Education and she has worked with Tri-County Planned Parenthood in Hamsburg, Director of Education of planned Parenthood in Southeastern Pennsylvania, this is all before she came to the Department of Education. Project Director Population 287 program, Baylor College of Medicine, and back in Houston she was also Planned parenthood of Southeast Texas and Houston also. She went to the institute for Sex Research, and she was our expert. She was our expert. When we had a public forum, she was allowed to talk. The parents were not allowed to ask questions. And that was her idea, she set it up, you know. And she's all over the State. So I wouldn't presume that it's just happening—

Q. You had mentioned in your testimony and you just said something a little different that I want to just have you clarify. Earlier you said she did workshops for the State Board of Education— A. Yes. Q. And now you've said something other than State Board of Education. A. Well, there's two. There's the Executive Academy of School Administrators. That's in Harrisburg. Q. Right. A. There's the Pennsylvania State Board of Education Association. Q. No. You're misspeaking. A. What are they? PSBA. Q. You're talking about the Pennsylvania School Boards Association. The State Board is something totally 288 different. A. Oh, I'm sorry. Q. You're talking about a school board association. A. Okay. The school board association, she conducted workshops for them. So she's all over the State. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Our next witness is Dr. Thomas Losoncy, from Berwyn, PA. Again, I'm going to ask that those who testify have the courtesy — give us the courtesy of limiting their remarks to the five minutes which were designated for the witnesses. Sir? DR. LOSONCY: My name is Dr. Thomas Losoncy. I'm a professor of philosophy at Villanova University, and I'd like to speak in favor of House Bill 2277. First of all, I have a heading, "Protection from what?" The present bill must be recognized as an attempt to protect someone, students, from something. What? Let us begin by saying it is not sex. What this bill is trying to do is protect students of our 289 elementary and secondary schools from undertrained teachers, directors of programs, and programs themselves which are not of the highest academic calibre. Specifically, and I here refer to the actual sex ed program euphemistically titled, "Family Life Education" introduced into the T-E School District in 1987-88.

In spite of its high-sounding title, the program says nearly nothing of the family as an institution and little, if anything, about love and/or love within the family setting in its early part, grades K-9. The family and love within marriage are treated as almost artificial or a conventional affair when discussed in the later years of the secondary program. But then what is the focus of "Family Life Education"?

The program projects a detailed clinical account of all the sexual parts of the anatomy, a taxonomy of them which one must learn over and over again, and progressively more and more about sexual acts and activity, and this from grades K-12. If one were becoming a counsellor or a physician, this would all be well and good, but such is not the case with these young students whose maturation levels, male and female, whose family values are as varied and rich as the tradition of this country. Where then are the difficulties? The program lacks respect for sexual 290 differences, maturation differences, and differences in values. Explicitly, it is a clinical approach which proceeds as if there exists no values and no real differences among students. Admittedly, the program encourages children to discuss these matters with parents and to learn their parents1 values and moral positions, but in recognizing no values and in treating all parents' values as of equal merit, the program instills the view that all are equally right or equally wrong. This is simply unrealistic and a value approach in itself that mocks all moral positions.

in addition, the program, in the district superintendent's words, quote, "is saturated with values," yet neither he nor anyone else can identify what these values are. This is indicative of the most serious problem of all - the program was devised and introduced without the help of any professional in the field of ethics or morality. The so-called, quote, "professionals," end quote, in sex education had no better credentials than those of graduate students, and the teachers were trained by these professionals to instruct the district's children. The training comprised two weeks of intensive desensitizing, the distribution of considerable nearly pornographic materials, and the introduction to lesson plans modeled after and employing 291

good amounts of planned parenthood's materials. This is hardly adequate preparation and background for launching such a program. Protection from whom? Secondly, the bill is an attempt to provide parents with some guarantee of their rights as parents, as taxpayers, and as educators of their children. As educators, parents have the right to know how and to what extent such an educational program lives up to what they think their children need to learn. This program, T-E's, was reticent about the exact materials to be employed, deliberately vague as to when, how, and at what ages various materials would be placed in children's hands and seemed intent on concealing from parents the credentials and the nature of the preparation of the directors and teachers. Only persistent inquiry and investigation brought out the ill- conceived planning and ill-prepared staff which would implement the program.

As parents and taxpayers, parents were excluded from having input in the development of this program in many ways. Whenever the school board met publicly, parents' input was confined to comment after the board moved and passed various motions. When the board did once allow prior public comment, a time limit was imposed and the board chairman made sure to call on a 292 number of pre-identified respondents who were, in some cases, as employees, sure to praise the program. In yet another veiled attempt to act as if there were public input, the board invited, thoroughly screened, and then set up a panel of community members whose role was defined as purely advisory and whose recommendations for change were quite soundly rejected. In short, a mini-tyrrany has been created at the school board level which openly and continuously defies parents to do anything about it with the public pronouncement from time to time that, quote, "Maybe if enough of you appear in protest we may change something," end quote. This in the face of hundreds in opposition. This may appear to be an isolated situation and something that doesn't require legislation on a State level. I think such a facile appraisal soon collapses when one considers a few recent trends in elementary and secondary school age children, part of the problem is the very philosophy of education in use. I asked the T-E District Curriculum Director if the district's approach was not similar to giving a child thorough and explicit information about handguns and at the same time saying how deadly they were but never cautioning them against their usage, how many children would be driven, out of curiosity, to use them? interestingly, he offered that 293 in teaching the district's drug education program they weren't sure that they were not turning children to using drugs. imagine the dismay of Nancy Reagan if she realized if for every time she urged children to "Say No," 100 times more kids were being carefully instructed on how to do drugs. is it any mystery that so many youngsters are being trapped in the drug culture, or, on the sex ed side, that so many girls are becoming pregnant and are having abortions when they are still mere children? Can one expect more of programs forced wholesale upon children and parents by people thoroughly incompetent to teach such programs, much less the poorly devised programs being used? Is it any wonder then that a recent national poll shows an overwhelming number of American parents would send their children to private schools if they could afford it? Is it any wonder that in the past few years in Pennsylvania scores on the TELLS test have shown children in private and parochial schools to do far better than their public school counterparts? Is it any wonder that in the T-E School District, in spite of an influx of children, the public school enrollment is going down each year, at all levels, and that the private school enrollment increases? What should one expect when school administrations and school board members put on 294 airs about themselves as professionals and yet they do not have degrees any better than the parents with whom they deal, and often have inferior degrees? Who can blame parents for complaining and calling for this protective legislation?

In conclusion, I thank those who have brought this bill before the legislature in the name of the many aggrieved parents in my school district. It is a modest beginning to a long-needed move against current trends in the public schools. However, it is just the beginning. There is need for a legislature investigation of the credentials of public school teachers and administrators, especially as regards to practice of conducting m-house courses for credit as opposed to taking bona fide university courses. There is, finally, a need for the legislature to enact a bill that will enable the public to recall, as in other States, in a reasonably short time and by petition, school board members who are incompetent to hold the office they do. The alternative is the denial of parental rights and an even more rapid decline of the once great public school system of education in this country. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. 295 BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Losoncy) Q. Sir, you are a resident of the Tredyffrin- Easttown School District? A. Yes, indeed, for 17 or 18 years now. Q. And you have children in that school district? A. I did. I've taken them out in terms of the public school. They're now in private schools. Q. At what age level are they? A. 16 and 14. Q. Did you take them out because of the experience with the sex ed issue? A. One explicitly for that reason. Q. Uh-huh. You speak in some general terms in terms of your testimony. A. Um-hum. Q. And we've heard a little bit about the situation in that school district from other parents earlier today, so I understand that you are not the only person who has complaints. Were you as a parent denied access to information about the curriculum that was proposed for your child's class or his age group? His/her age group? A. Yeah. I'd have to say that that whole situation took place on two different levels. First of 296 all, there was the statement that these are preparatory pieces of information and they're still in development on the specific level, so some things you were shown, some you were not. When you tried to get information about the general program specifically to see where it was going, part of that program was not available at all. You could not have any access to it. Interestingly enough, it's quite clear that the school board or the school administration had ordered all the books for the program to be implemented on all levels before the program was even approved, which is kind of interesting.

Q. The curriculum director in the district, who is that, please? A. Barry Yocum. Q. Is that person still there? A. Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. DR. LOSONCY: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Rashidah Hassan, Executive Director of BEBASHI, Philadelphia, PA. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: All right. Our next witness is Marcy Holteen, from Ambler. 297 MS. HOLTEEN: Well, I'm thankful for this opportunity to testify regarding House Bill 2277 for two reasons, but I also want to clarify something, that there is a very good reason why the bill is called a protection bill for parents and pupils, and my testimony will address that. To save time, I'm not just going to read from the prepared remarks. I'm going to skip around a little bit. One reason that I'm testifying is to ensure that school students are protected from arbitrarily introduced abusive teaching materials, which is happening all too often. And we've heard a lot of testimony today about that. The second is to ensure that parents are notified well in advance of the beginning school term the exact full detail of teaching materials, questionnaires and programs to be used for their child to understand the right to sign in their children to classes only the parents approve of and not be required to withdraw the children from classes they may disapprove of. This was in the past and still should be a parent's entitlement, but we need law to insure this because some liberties are taken by some in our school system which deny this right of parents, which we've heard so much of today. Now, attached to this testimony I have an 298 example of a very horrible sex education course in the Pittsburgh school system which I was going to refer to which took parents two years to get rid of, and yet the school told them it was mandated and it was not. That is attached to the testimony. Now, here at this time I would like to give a specific and very recent example of intrusion by school policy and personnel into the rights of parents, which will help us understand why it's called a protection of parents' and pupils' rights and why a law is needed. This September 1988, Hatboro Horsham School District assumed the right by published threat to demand that parents support and cooperate with school personnel on school policy before the school year begins. The principal of the high school provided a tear-out page in the Hatboro Horsham Student-Parent Handbook stating a parental pledge which must be signed by parents and returned to school by September 16th or their child will serve a detention, detention given on Saturday morning during out-of-school hours on parent and family time, which is also a new school policy this year. When this type of situation is thought through by legislators and the public at large, all will agree that school personnel do not have and have not been given the right to threaten parents and children, and yet 299 this happens and we must provide safeguards against it. For parents to be put in positions to forever having to be put on the look-out for abusive materials, curriculum, and programs, not being able to trust school personnel keeping these kinds of things out of the classrooms, and being put under threat by school personnel jeopardizes the once trusted relationships between school personnel and parents.

The cost of the protection for teachers' rights is well known. The costs of education go up by the billions of dollars every year to do this. Such reform law to protect children's rights would merely place legislators and school board members in the position to redirect education funding to preserve children's rights. Don't our children, the innocent and vulnerable, deserve at least equal protection of their rights, as teachers have? Now, I'm going to read from this Student- Parent Handbook some examples of why it is invasive, it is a threat, and is what I consider even unconstitutional. There are 29 questions that parents are to agree that they have read and answered before they sign this parental pledge. Then I will read the parental pledge to you. For instance, the second question, "in your 300 relationship with each of your children, do you regularly and spontaneously tell them they are loved no matter what?" Now, that is an invasion into a parent parenting. Number six, "When there is a problem, do you get all the facts and then decide what to do instead of always believing your child's excuses?" Number seven, "Have you identified your personal vulnerabilities so your children can't manipulate you to escape discipline?" Number nine, "Do you insist that your children limit their activities and do fewer things well instead of many things superficially?" Number twelve, "As parents, do you help your children to accept failure as part of success and to use setbacks as learning experiences?" Number thirteen, "Even though it's painful, do you avoid taking over when a child is experiencing a problem and instead help the child assume personal control of the situation?" Number twenty-four, "As parents, do you limit your use of credit and not permit your child to use your credit cards?" There are 29 of these things that have only to do with parenting at home among parent and children in the privacy and sacredness of their own relationships and 301 yet the parents have to pledge that they read them and answered them, then they sign a pledge saying, "I have read the Student-Parent Handbook and understand the policies and programs therein. in addition, I will discuss the Student-Parent Handbook with my student. I also plan to support and cooperate with school personnel throughout the coming school year in an effort to enhance a positive education experience with my students." At the bottom it says, "please send this page to Mr. David Hottenstein, Principal, Hatboro-Horsham High School,...or have your student return it to his/her homeroom teacher by September 16, 1988. Every student must," with a black emphasis, "return this signed page or a detention will be given." A detention being given to a student for something their parent does or does not do right at the beginning of the year before parents have a chance to see materials, have any understanding of the programs or movies that might be shown or what kind of methodologies the teachers might use. Now, this has been described as Hitler's Germany youth Movement by parents in Hatboro-Horsham. I wrote a letter to the principal very specifically outlining to him, because I knew him — several years ago he left our school system. He was, at one time, a personal friend of my husband's. He left the school 302 system, has come back as a principal of the high school years after we had many go-arounds over this kind of parent rights issue, the principal and I talking this over, so this is a personal letter to him from me. And I will skip down to a beginning paragraph — his name is Dave, so I addressed him, "Dave—" CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, I'm going to have to ask you to summarize. We're into 8 minutes now. MS. HOLTEEN: "perhaps you would be able to see the new regime as parents see it - as not only control of their children but control of the parents, too.... "You might see that a parent with a natural instinct that their children and their homelife with their children are their own affair, feels invaded. You might see that the Handbook steps beyond the prerogatives of the school in certain portions, and that both those portions of the Handbook, and worse, the detention system, are an anathema to the privacy and rights of families. "For you to require parents to have to sign a pledge to you and the 29-points you listed in the Handbook is to require parents to turn their relationships with their children and their rights as parents in the privacy of their home, over to you, who as 303 an administrator in the education establishment, is the secular state." I asked him several questions in that letter which you can read later, but I'll start with one of them. "Should you, as Principal, not have printed the 29-steps listed m the Handbook, but sent them as a separate sheet to parents as kind reminders to parents, only, and let them make up their own mind how to handle affairs in their own homes, without the "follow-up, check-up* by having them "swear*, so to speak, in signing the pledge you required, you could have done parents a favor and come up smelling like a rose. "Should you, as Principal, not have had parents sign a pledge to turn their children over to the state school, and themselves too, you would not have put yourself in the position you have. "Should you, as Principal, not have used the threat of detention of the children, held over parents' heads, if the parents did not sign the pledge and have it turned in by September 16th, you would not have placed yourself in the position of being seen as a "Hitler's Germany officer of the State'. Someone used you. (Or, did you do this all on your own?)" Now, he has just come back into the school 304 system, having been away four years. Did he make up these 29 steps and is he, as principal, alone asking the parents to sign this pledge, or is the school system instituting a new policy that we should all guard against and watch for all over the United States? Because the same thing is happening in Maine. Thank you. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Holteen.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Just a couple of questions I'd like you to clarify. i BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Holteen) Q. You mentioned a newspaper article describing the sex course used in Pittsburgh schools. I'm searching for that material that you gave me. A. Okay, it's right after — it's the first thing right there. You're at it right now. MR. WHITE: Norwin Schools. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Holteen) Q. Oh, it is not Pittsburgh School District. A. It is a Pittsburgh School District School. Q. There is a Pittsburgh School District and there is a Norwin School District. Are you referring to the Pittsburgh School District? A. Well, I'm referring to that article, what it 305 says about that school district. Q. Okay. A. It says it's near Pittsburgh. That's all I know. Q. Okay. There is a difference between the Pittsburgh School District— A. All right. Q. —and I don't want to have you unfairly characterize Pittsburgh school District if you're wrong, and apparently you're wrong. You're speaking about the Norwin School District then. A. All right. Nevertheless, the material stands for itself, sir, and it is ugly and horrible and the parents had to fight for two years to get it out, although the school said it was mandated and it was not.

Q. I understand, but if I would not have done that, the record would have shown that you were referring to the Pittsburgh School District, which was inaccurate. You speak about Mr. Thomas Gentzel and you cite a letter from him, four very good reasons to favor House Bill 2277. Is it your understanding that Mr. Gentzel supports House Bill 2277 in that letter? A. I'm saying that he gives four very good reasons for support of the House Bill. Q. I should advise you that last week Mr. 306 Gentzel, testifying on behalf of the School Board Association, testified against this bill and cited some of the items that you characterized as good reasons to be reasons for his association to oppose the bill. A. I'm very well aware of that, sir. I'm using his reasons as good reasons for the bill. He stated those. Those are his own words, and I'm using his words saying that I couldn't have said it better myself, Mr. Gentzel. He stated it perfectly - full protection of parents' and pupils' rights in those four statements. Q. Okay, again, I want to make sure the record does not suggest that Mr. Gentzel argued in favor of the bill or that he cited these as reasons to be for it. That was your interpretation.

A. My longer written testimony would question is he against all those things and how could he possibly be. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. MS. HOLTEEN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled witness is Molly Kelly, from Philadelphia. I believe she may not be here. Okay, she will apparently submit written testimony. Our next witness is Meridyth Senes. MS. SENES: Chairman Cowell, member of the 307 committee, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify regarding House Bill 2277. My name is Meridyth Senes. I am a school board director of the Lower Merion School District, and the County Coordinator for the Montgomery County School Directors Legislative Committee. While I have discussed the proposed Parent and Pupil Protection Act extensively with my colleagues, I am testifying today as an individual. It is my understanding that House Bill 2277 was prompted by a controversial sex education guide published by the State Department of Education. it is apparent that many of the cosponsors of this bill were led to believe that the legislation was designed to prohibit the Department of Education from producing similar publications in the future. The proposed legislation goes well beyond the original intent, however, intruding into the school board's responsibility and local control of curriculum. As you know, school board directors are State officials elected locally. We are the legislature's partner in providing universal public education. But the key element in this working relationship is local control. School board members reflect the values, philosophy and will of their community. The original intent of this bill was to eliminate an evil, the 308 provision by the State of what was considered inappropriate material. The legislation, in its present form, exchanges one evil for another: Imposition by the State of control of curriculum content. I'd like to address specific sections of House Bill 2277. Section 2503, Board Approval For Sex Education instruction. There are established School Code procedures regarding adoption of curricular material. Specifically, Section 803 of the Pennsylvania School Code requires that textbooks in school districts, on recommendation by the superintendent, be adopted by the school board by a two-thirds vote at a regularly scheduled meeting between the first of April and the first of August each year. in our district, as in most others, whenever there is a significant curricular change, in any subject area, a series of meetings is held to present the material to the public, discuss the changes and address community concerns. This has been done in mathematics instruction, social studies, and most recently with the AIDS curriculum. In addition, our district has policy provisions for parents who wish to raise concerns or objections to specific material in any subject area. Section 2504, parental Notice Of Course Material. The process suggested in House Bill 2277 is 309 costly in terms of staff time and money due to the number of mailings required, the amount of material to be mailed, and the timeframe involved. The process set up for AIDS instruction would be a more efficient system. That is, educational materials and instruction shall be determined by the local school district and be age appropriate to the group being taught. Prior to instruction, materials shall be made available to parents and guardians during normal school hours or at teacher/parent conferences. Section 2505, Prior Written Consent of Parent Or Guardian. House Bill 2277 contains provisions for opting in, which is an administrative nightmare. I suggest opting out, as is now required under State Board regulations for teaching about AIDS. Section 2506, protection of pupil rights. This is a particularly disturbing section. Standards already exist for the use of testing and treatment of students. As written, I have serious concerns about a district's ability to assess, diagnose and provide services for special education students under the restrictions of this section. Also, in the context of this bill, this section does not pertain. Section 2510, enforcement. The filing of the complaint should be limited to residents of the school

\ 310 district and not open to anyone. I am concerned about the possibility of an injunction being granted which would halt instruction. Notwithstanding my concerns about specific sections in House Bill 2277, I believe this legislation to be inherently flawed. If enacted, it would represent an improper interference by the State into local control of instruction. One need only substitute the word "English" or "social studies" or "science" where "sex education" now stands to see the potential for harm in the proposed parent and Pupil protection Act. I believe it would be better for education in this State for House Bill 2277 to die in committee. Thank you for your courtesy and attention. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you for your testimony. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Senes) Q. Yours, again, is one of the vast majority of districts about which I don't recall hearing any specific criticism, although we've heard specific— A. I'm happy to say. Q. —criticism about a couple districts. A. I understand that. Q. And there are two districts that I will read, Philadelphia, and those districts firmly fixed in my 311

mind. Are there some things that are occurring in your district that perhaps go beyond the requirements of the law in terms of working with parents, in terms of making sure parents are informed about issues, particularly the sex ed kinds of issues, inviting their — welcoming their participation? Things that go beyond the law that we might reasonably, again, impose on all districts to help solve some of the problems that were cited earlier, and I think you heard some of the testimony? A. Yes. Well, I'm happy to say that we have a very open process in Lower Merion. We have an actively involved parent community. We have regularly scheduled every month an education committee meeting separate from our business agenda, at which we only address educational issues.

Q. This is a full board meeting? A. Full board meeting. It is referred to as the education committee meeting, but it is the board meeting as a whole. And at those meetings we discuss various curricular issues, programs, what's going on in the classroom, we have presentations by teachers, by administrators. And as part of this, as in most districts, there's a five-year cycle of review of different areas of curriculum. We have just been reviewing the social studies curriculum so that books 312 were presented at the meeting, the curricular material, all different sorts, giving us the whole range of scope and sequence, K-12, and we've been going through that for months, and parents have been involved in the process and have had the material available to them. This is long before we go through adoption. I use social studies as an example, but we did not quite as an extensive process with the AIDS curriculum because we were under different kinds of constraints through the State in terms of timeframe and what we had to do. But again, we presented all the material, we had open meetings, not just of the board meeting but we scheduled meetings at night and during the day so that parents could choose according to their schedules when they could come, review the material and ask questions of the director of elementary education and teachers who would actually be teaching the courses.

So we have a process in place. You referred to the State imposing a process on local school districts. I believe in local control and I think there's a remedy. America is a wonderful country. Ballot box. If the school board is not functioning in a way that you feel is responsive, you have a remedy. Q. If a majority agree with you, or if you're able to persuade a majority. 313

A. But you see, that is the point. If a minority of parents feel their rights are being infringed on and either choose to run themselves or run their own candidate and that candidate loses, that is a reflection of the will of the majority. And again, in America, if you are so disturbed by the public school system, there are options in terms of private and parochial education. I am uncomfortable with the State imposing curricular standards because I do believe that that should be a reflection of the community's values. And by and large, I mean, I've sat here and I've listened to things that disturb me tremendously. If I were a parent in those communities I would be equally as exercised, but if one or two or three districts out of 501 are not performing adequately, particularly this mailing thing. I mean, the cost — this figure of five cents a pupil is absolute nonsense. I mean, the stamp alone is 25 cents, not even calculating in the cost of paper and the secretarial time to reproduce this information, the cost of the paper. You know, five cents is a ridiculous figure. It would cost a considerable amount of money, and in our district I would say money is not an issue. We are a very wealthy district. That's not a concern to me, but I don't think it's an appropriate use of staff time. 314 Q. In your district, with respect to the sex ed programs again, do you provide an opt-out option? A. We have an opt-out option in everything, essentially. Q. Uh-huh. A. We have a policy in place that if a parent objects to their child reading a particular book, we have a policy in place where alternatives can be substituted. So it's not just in sex education, it's in all subject areas. I mean, I don't think a parent has ever objected to a mathematics program, but it usually happens in English and at the high school level, a particular book will be offensive to a parent and the parent will come in. We do have a procedure that they have to go through, it's to discuss it with the teacher first, really quantify the objections. If still not satisfied, then to go to the principal and then the principal and the teacher work out an alternative program for that child. And that's been done on many, many occasions. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much. MS. SENES: My pleasure. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Dr. Blanche Kauffman, from Swarthmore. DR. KAUFFMAN: Thank you for the opportunity to testify this afternoon. 315 In testifying on HB 2277, I don't want to focus on the intentions of its drafters but rather I want to voice some concerns about what the bill actually says and what effect it might have on me as a taxpayer primarily.

First of all, I agree wholeheartedly with the bill when it says that all sex education courses in Pennsylvania must make it clear that the only absolutely sure way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy is by abstaining from sex. I think it's important that that be clear. It's the rest of the bill that troubles me. Its regulation of the practice of school psychology is so broadly stated as I think to be devastating. As I read it, it forbids schools to require testing for the diagnosis of any problem which is potentially embarrassing to the parents or the student. When I wrote to Representative Gannon about this, he replied to me that the bill "addresses the idea" that "certain information sought by school psychologists may be of a very personal nature." That is not, however, what the bill says. It does not define "very" personal, and I suspect that it would ultimately be up to the courts to decide whether, for example, reading achievement is personal and whether failures in reading 316 are potentially embarrassing. Clearly, testing for mental retardation could be embarrassing, learning disabilities could be embarrassing, failing a reading readiness test may be embarrassing for some parents, and severe emotional problems are always embarrassing. Any one of those areas could result in very time consuming and costly lawsuits against the school district.

This bill does not even differentiate between individually administered diagnostic testing and group diagnostic testing. It forbids the job category school psychologist to do diagnostic testing of any kind unless there is a prior carefully worded release from both parents and children, so I would assume a classroom teacher could administer achievement and aptitude tests on a group basis, but a school psychologist could not participate in that activity without being in danger of bringing down a lawsuit if any student or parent is embarrassed by flunking any of the State mandated or district mandated tests. I worked as a school psychologist and about 90 percent of my working time was spent on the detailed diagnosis of learning difficulties and on curriculum development with teachers to help specialized curriculum for children with specific kinds of learning problems. 317 This bill may intend to assure privacy about sexual and domestic matters, but what it actually says to me is no diagnostic testing which reveals potentially embarrassing personal information, and parents and students decide what's personal, what's embarrassing. Okay. Second, the restrictions on the mere mention of contraception and/or abortion are so sweeping and tucked into so many of the bill's provisions that reading it as a non-lawyer, I would feel entitled to bring suit against my local school district if any employee of the district alluded to or permitted others to discuss the mere existence of such things, except in specific sex education classes where I have the curriculum and the teacher's resume available. This could lead to some interesting situations. Unless AIDS education is limited to sex education classes, then the word "condom" would be illegal in AIDS education. if referred to in a drug education as opposed to a sex education class, AIDS would have to be divorced from sexual transmission. You could only discuss in terms of drug use. Biology classes are specifically empowered in this bill to teach human reproduction, but a biology teacher could be fired if she or he answered student questions about artificial means of preventing zygote formation or implantation. 318 It gets even sillier. Perhaps only a court case could decide if a teacher could be fired or district sued for permitting classroom discussion of a current event, like the one I heard on television the other night about the HIV killing properties of nonoxnol-9, because that drug also kills sperm and can be used as a contraceptive, and this would be discussion of contraception by other than the authorized sex education curriculum. As with the restrictions on school psychologists, the restrictions are so broad and so vaguely defined that they would interfere with the day- to-day work of real teachers with real students. I feel that the bill is trying to kill a mosquito with an atom bomb, and our children get the fall-out. Frankly, if I worked in a school district in Pennsylvania and this bill were law, I would be in a constant state of anxiety about what some parent or even outsider who doesn't even live in the district might decide what this bill really meant, given the language of the bill, and I would be out looking for a job where if I let a 17-year-old talk to me I would not be risking my employment. Third, the change on parental approval forms be opt-in as opposed to opt-out bothers me a great deal. 319 My feeling is, and I gather from today's testimony I'm wrong. I thought that the opt-out provision was statewide. I thought that good, caring, well-functioning parents already had a right to inspect sex education curriculum materials and to have their children exempted form such classes if they so desired. Disorganized, indifferent, non-functional parents can do the same, but if they just lose or ignore the school notice, their children still get some education about reproduction and human sexuality. Under this bill, the children least likely to get accurate, loving instruction at home are denied the chance to get it at school. I feel that it's like making knowledge about human reproduction and sexuality available only to an elite, and I do not understand why.

As far as intent goes, I disagree with the thrust of the bill to keep the existence of contraception and abortion a secret. On pragmatic grounds, I think it's impossible trying to force schools to pretend that nobody knows simply makes them look both phony and dumb, and that's not what an education bill should do. I don't trust lawyers to run our schools any more than you trust the educators to do it, but this bill I think is a good example of why not. It interferes dreadfully with day- to-day teaching relationships. 320 If you must legislate these policies, please at least limit yourselves, be specific and clear, instead of using sweeping language whose implications will cost taxpayers untold thousands of dollars in legal battles, disrupt special education programs by precluding accurate diagnosis, and perhaps force good, dedicated teachers and school nurses to either clam up or risk their jobs because the law says far more than it says it intends to say. If I may just add, listening to the testimony today, my feeling was that the problem seems to be with the local school boards refusing to enlist parents in curriculum development and a failure of the elective process to produce responsive, elected officials in the local districts. I honestly do not see how HB 2277 can possibly help with this problem. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. just two quick things. You were half right on the opt-out that you probably understand. The opt-out is statewide— DR. KAUFFMAN: I thought so. CHAIRMAN COWELL: —for AIDS. DR. KAUFFMAN: Oh, for AIDS. Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: It's part of the AIDS 321 regulation. There are no regulations pertaining to other sex ed. DR. KAUFFMAN: I have no problem with that for reading, writing, arithmetic and sex ed.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: And you changed one word in your final remarks there when you were speaking about "I don't trust lawyers to run our schools anymore than," and then you said, "than you trust educators." There are no lawyers on this side of the table, at least at this point. DR. KAUFFMAN: Oh, okay. Legislators. CHAIRMAN COWELL: We have only a couple lawyers on the committee, and there are far fewer lawyers in the legislature than some people imagine these days. Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. DR. KAUFFMAN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Judith Emerson, Elementary School Counselor at the Palisades School District. MS. EMERSON: Good afternoon. My name is Judith Emerson. I am employed as an elementary school counselor in the Palisades School District in upper Bucks County. I'm pleased to be able to present testimony at 322 this public hearing regarding proposed House Bill 2277. I would like to express two major areas of concern with this proposed legislation, from my point of view as a school counsellor. First, regarding Section 2506-A, entitled "Protection of Pupil Rights." This section discusses psychological and psychiatric testing. In Pennsylvania, parent permission is required for these evaluations. This includes the concept of prior informed consent in that parents must know and understand the reason testing has been requested, the instruments to be used and how the collected data will be used and stored. No school district is able to, quote, "require," unquote, such testing, unless due process is pursued under the rights of public Law 94-142. I believe these current restrictions are sufficient to protect parent and student rights.

In addition, the specific restrictions imposed here could be potentially dangerous and contrary to present law. Currently, schools are required to provide appropriate educational programs to all children. Somehow, "appropriate" must be defined. At this time, a socially and emotionally disturbed child requires a psychiatric evaluation to determine whether this placement is appropriate for the child. The nature of 323 the child's social/emotional problems may lie in the home setting or in relationships with other family members. Thus, these areas may need to be probed in order to make an accurate diagnosis to protect the rights of the child. If the psychiatric evaluation is withdrawn as the means of placement, as this bill suggests, then how is such a determination to be made? What other professional is qualified to assess a child's level of mental health? Or is it intended to conflict with public Law 94-142 and leave these children in regular classes to their detriment and that of the other children in the class? It seems this section is misnamed. It doesn't protect student rights.

Also, if in the course of such evaluations a suspicion of child abuse surfaces, some probing should occur to establish the validity of such a suspicion before complying with the laws governing the reporting of child abuse. Mistaken reporting could be embarrassing to the family and costly to the State. From the other side, the child has the right to live in a safe environment and is thus protected by child abuse laws. This bill would

negate those laws. Two good reasons not to restrict the direction and depth of testing done. My second area of concern immediately follows the pupil rights section and relates to the restrictions 324 placed upon counsellors and other school personnel working with and caring for students. Counsellors are non-judgmental listeners who have skills in assisting students toward greater self-discipline and self- determination. The relationship between the counsellor and student is the key to the success of this experience. This proposed legislation seems to be telling me that if an elementary child comes in and begins to talk about troubling family relationships, I must tell the child we cannot discuss that. Similarly, if a junior or senior high counsellor sees a student who expresses concern about a homosexual encounter or a possible pregnancy, that counsellor is to say it cannot be discussed.

I have serious problems with this attitude on several fronts. if certain topics are off limits, then the relationship between the counsellor and the student become stilted and ineffective. Thoughts arise such as, "If I can't talk about this, then it must be worse than I thought," or "If I can't talk about this here, then I guess I won't talk to anyone." Or worse yet, "I guess I'll ask my friends." Counsellors can be effective, concerned adults to act as sounding boards for student concerns. Totally open dialogue and trust are musts. Teen pregnancy rates and child abuse incidents are still on 325 the rise. Closing doors will not decrease these rates. Sometimes students are unable or unwilling to discuss certain issues with their parents. Should a concerned adult discuss relevant information and make referrals for the student, or shall we send them back to their friends on the street? Because so many divergent opinions and points of view exist in our society, it is important that the schools remain neutral. We can present information and teach decisionmaking skills, but it is the family who sets the moral tone for the values used in making the decisions. Counsellors would not infringe on that. This bill seriously impairs the role the schools must fulfill. It infringes on the student rights it proposes to protect.

I urge that this bill be rejected. I wish to thank the House Education Committee for allowing me to present my views on this bill, or on portions of this bill. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Just a couple questions.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Emerson) Q. Earlier today, and I don't recall if you were here at that point, one of the witnesses brought to our attention something that I guess I've seen and certainly 326 have heard about before, something that's called "The Mind Test." Are you familiar with this? A. No, I'm not. Q. It says — well, let me have you take a look at it. That would be the easiest thing.

That and some of the items on that test, particularly those that are checked, was cited as an example of the kinds of intrusive questions that sometimes are posed to students and it was suggested that the protection of pupil rights section might protect students from that kind of intrusive questioning. From your point of view, and it was not suggested that that was administered by school psychologists or school psychiatrists, from your point of view, does that — is that instrument appropriately characterized as a psychological test or psychiatric test?

A. I'm afraid you'd have to ask a psychologist or psychiatrist to really define that for you. Q. Okay. A. I can't say. Q. I wondered if you had seen that kind of test before. There were a couple of other cases where I heard of similar things being administered that were administered by teachers as part of a class. It was not 327 part of psychological testing or psychiatric testing. The rest of my questions then would be irrelevant and I should direct them to somebody else. A. The only thing I could comment on is I'm familiar in some testing that has been done with elementary students that open-ended questions are sometimes used by a psychologist or psychiatrist to elicit response from the student about like, you know, "Two things I wish for most," or "Something that concerns me is...." Trying to assess some level of the student's mental health. But I haven't seen anything like this before. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. I'll save the questions for somebody else then. Thank you very much. Are there any other questions? Greg. MR. WHITE: Two quick observations. First, on the issue of special education students, I think the bill may be a little bit confusing. There was an effort in one of the sentences to try and make it clear that the student preclude the necessary testing for identification of students who are in special education, and apparently some people don't think it's quite clear enough. I think the sponsor's intent was not to preclude whatever testing is necessary to provide 328 services for special education as far as trying to place a student in an appropriate regular education class. I'll let the Secretary of Education deal with that. I don't think it was the intention in that direction at all.

And finally, on the issue of child abuse, I think there may be a little bit of confusion and there may be some need for a little bit of more further clarification. I don't think the bill prohibits school officials from reporting incidents of child abuse. The principle statutory construction which is a more specific provision in the law which is under the Child protective Services law which requires the reporting of these instances would supercede a very, very general reference of that nature, so I think when the bill was drafted the drafters considered not precluding the reporting of suspected actions of child abuse. So just for your information, there may be some need for clarification. MS. EMERSON: Okay. I probably didn't express myself well on that point then. The first point you mentioned, where I was picking up on the psychiatric evaluation, was on page 7, the end there where it says that "no psychiatric or psychological examinations, testing or treatment 329 prescribed under subsection (a)," which includes the intrusive questioning, "shall be used as a basis for determining the need for special education or individualized counseling." So I read that and I interpreted that to mean that if the psychological included questioning about relationships in the family and those issues, that it would not be allowed for placement. MR. WHITE: Okay. MS. EMERSON: And my point was that sometimes a socially/emotionally disturbed child, the nature of the problem is in the home, and some of that has to be looked into in order to determine whether there is psychological disturbance there or psychiatric disturbance. On the other point, I had not made myself clear then. What I was more concerned about was again the probing. When an elementary child comes in to me and says, "My mother was so angry at me last night she beat me," okay, I generally do ask a few questions about what happened because at that point, you know, to one child a beating may be a swat on the rear end; to another child a beating is with a strap on other parts of the body than just the buttocks. So in my determination as a school counsellor, is this a beating I must report? I do have to ask some probing questions which a family might find 330 embarrassing. MR. WHITE: Okay. That's a bit of a gray area, possibly. We had testimony earlier today that said it really is the responsibility of the school personnel solely to report suspected incidents of child abuse, then it becomes the responsibility of the Children and Youth Services, I believe, to make the actual investigation and determination. So I guess, again, some people would think that the bill covers that situation because of the actual investigation being conducted by another agency other than the school. Is that the proper procedure, as you understand it?

MS. EMERSON: I understand, yes, and I guess what I'm looking at is, you know, the potential embarrassment to the family of an improper child abuse reporting incident and trying to avoid that. MR. WHITE: Thank you. MS. EMERSON: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Our next witness is Mary Park Wederbrand, from Radnor. MS. WEDERBRAND: The battle lines are drawn. The ACLU, NOW, and planned parenthood versus the parents of the children in public schools. And what are we fighting for? The souls of the children - the input they 331 receive at school which controls their dreams, their values, their fantasies, their motivation and their ultimate lifestyle. I'm here because of a masturbation movie I saw 10 years ago. it was shown to a class of 13-year- olds without parental consent or even knowledge of the class. The movie used nude teenage models and showed many different ways to masturbate, the expressions on the face, the motions and sounds. At the conclusion of the movie, the boy and girl embrace, french kiss and roll over and over on the ground while the commentator intones, "And now, the next step is sexual intercourse."

After that movie I determined to get to the philosophy behind why planned Parenthood would distribute and encourage use of such a movie. The philosophy behind sex education became evident as I read and began looking into the guidelines for teaches, classroom materials, suggested outside reading materials and saw additional movies. The first thing that struck me in 1978 was the emphasis on promoting homosexuality. One movie I saw, after it was shown to a group of eighth graders, depicted a man and two women having sex on a mattress on the floor. The singsong voice explaining their actions told the viewers that lesbian sex and bisexuality and 332 group sex were alternate lifestyles and one should experiment to see which lifestyle one was more comfortable with. Throughout all my reading and viewing of the sex materials taught in the schools, I realized the

philosophy was: Find a lifestyle through experimentation that you were comfortable with. Responsible sex at any age is permissible assuming birth control is used and both parties willingly consent to the action. Any reference to biblical standards is referred to as old fashioned, not applicable today, and verbally sneered at. you can sense the hostility of today's sex education materials when biblical standards of chastity, monogamy, and heterosexual love are mentioned.

Why should any of us trust the public school system? imagine a bill such as House Bill 2277 being fought over - a chance for parents to see exactly what they will be learning in a curriculum which could cover K-12, a 13-year indoctrination of a subject which will affect them forever. I have four children - a 22-year-old boy who graduated from Bucknell, a 20-year-old girl who is a senior at vanderbilt University, an 18-year-old girl at Hamilton College in New York, and a sophomore at Radnor High School. None of my children has participated in sex 333 ed classes since 1978, nor have they been in any decisionmaking or problem solving classes using values clarification, situation ethics or moral relativism. Why waste their time learning methods which have failed a generation so badly that sex, crime, suicide, drugs and depression are epidemic? I saw the materials, I read them, I disagreed with the philosophy and I removed them from all classes utilizing that philosophy. My children understood, agreed, and respected me for doing so. This bill should pass. Do you want a masturbation movie shown to your son or daughter? Do you want your fifth grader putting condoms on bananas as an exercise? DO you want your 6-year-old to "Draw the world's biggest penis" or to be told to listen to mommy and daddy making love in their bedroom? Do you want homosexuality presented as an option for your child to try and see if he or she is comfortable with it?

The sex ed philosophy I have described will continue unless parents see the material and can decide for themselves if this is the kind of emphasis they want their children to receive. This philosophy has been in public schools nationwide for 25 years. When the ACLU, NOW and planned Parenthood unite to fight an issue, the public should be aware that more than sex ed is involved. At issue is a behavioral 334 modification program aimed at redirecting the moral development of our children. The end result, if the ACLU, NOW and planned Parenthood are successful, will be a nation of young adults embracing the humanist philosophy of life.

Wake up, Pennsylvania. House Bill 2277 is an opportunity to act. The question is, can we save a nation already destroyed by this philosophy? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Wederbrand) Q. Early in your testimony you mentioned a movie you saw 10 years ago. is that movie in use in your school district?

A. I have absolutely no idea. I presented that as how I got involved in this. Q. On page 2 of your testimony you indicate or you ask, "Do you want your fifth grader putting condoms on bananas," et cetera, et cetera. Are those practices in your school district? A. It really doesn't make any difference. That happens to be, but that really doesn't make any difference because when you all ask to be specific, we are talking about a philosophy, a nationwide philosophy, involving sex education. A specific — they did put condoms on bananas at Lankenau Hospital. The kids were 335 taken out of the school, taken to Lankenau Hospital where somebody thought this was appropriate behavior. I don't. And it isn't up to me as a parent to have to spend hours and hours — I got here today, I was supposed to testify at 10 after 3:00, I listened to people being given 20 and 25 minutes on people opposed to this bill. I sat there patiently listening to this. It is now 5:00, and I resent it. I resent my whole day being spent here and the hours I have devoted to testifying in Washington and Harrisburg upon three occasions. I resent it. I have four kids and I don't want to have to have an adversarial position with the public school system in this State or anywhere else I go.

This is not a Downing town problem or a Radnor problem. I mean, you're trying to make it sound like this is something that we can isolate into a failure of a school board to react appropriately to a parent. This is nationwide. Every single school district in the United States of America is having problems with sex ed and believe you me will with the AIDS education, because it was told to me by a person promoting AIDS education that they would not say that homosexuality was wrong, it is an alternate lifestyle. Well, I don't agree, and my child is not going to be in that situation. You know, there's just a big difference in philosophy behind the sex ed. 336 CHAIRMAN COWELL: We won't keep you any longer. Thank you. The next witness is Sheila Tice, from Sciota, PA. MS. LUKSIC: I'm the next two witnesses. Their car broke down and I went and picked up the testimony, so how about if I just read it?

CHAIRMAN COWELL: What if you just submit it? MS. LUKSIC: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: It will become a part of the record. Ann-Marie will take it and transcribe it into the record and it will become a part of the transcript. That is Sheila and Rena Patrick? MS. LUKSIC: And Rena, yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Let me just note for the record then that the testimony that was to be presented by Sheila Tice, from Scioto, PA, and Rena Patrick, from Stroudsburg, PA, is being submitted for the record. (The following is the submitted prepared testimony from Sheila Tice, Scioto, Pennsylvania.) "My name is Sheila Tice, and I am a concerned parent of three pre-school aged children in the Stroudsburg School District of Monroe County. I became 337 aware of problems in the sex education program in our school district when one of the 10th grade boys in our community told his father, a funeral director, that he had just learned about necrophilia and asked his Dad if he had ever tried it. This comment led us to investigate. "We found that there were no guidelines or standards, no school board oversight, and no approval required for any materials or resource people a teacher might choose to use. "After some research, we discovered that the 10th grade, a handout was used as a resource sheet in which the students were required to write the descriptions of such terms as necrophilia, pedophilia, bestiality, anal sex, and other homosexual practices. None of the materials we viewed condemned these practices.

"We began by meeting with an administration official and the Health curriculum coordinator to discuss our concerns. We were told that a community advisory committee would be formed which would include parents, and that a detailed outline of the curriculum would be sent to every parent. That was in June 1987. "During the summer we heard nothing, so we followed up with a phone contact. We were told that the 338 curriculum was already established for the 1987-88 school year, but that they would soon begin planning for the following year. "In August 1987, I presented a summary of our concerns to the school board at its regularly public meeting. The board members had absolutely no knowledge of what was being taught in sex education and were shocked by the materials that I presented. The Superintendent said that the curriculum would be revised but that chastity would NOT be emphasized as the only truly healthful choice.

"We waited throughout last year for the parent committee to be formed and to receive our outline from the district, but nothing happened. When we called, we were first told that they were planning and later that the administration had decided not to follow through on any of their original promises. "This year we are once again being told that each teacher is totally free to use whatever he/she * feels comfortable with1 in the classroom without board approval or parental notification. So once again we would not know until after the fact that such topics as bestiality and necrophilia are being discussed with our children. "I thank the PA House Education Committee for 339 an opportunity to testify today on behalf of family values and our beloved children. We urge you to favor this bill with your full support! Thank you. "Sheila A. Tice, HCR #1 Box 465, Sciota, PA

18345." (The following is the submitted prepared testimony from Rena Patrick, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.) "My name is Rena Patrick. I am a concerned parent of an 8 year old, 13 year old, and 15 year old, who attend Stroudsburg Area School District of Monroe County, Pennsylvania. "I was clued in as to what was being taught in Stroudsburg High school when one of my friend's sons came home with a list of terms he learned in his sex- education class. The terms included bestiality, pedophilia (sex with infants), and necrophilia (sex with dead people). He asked his father, a funeral director, if he knew about sex with the dead. His parents, along with we other parents, did not feel it was xhealthy' to learn about these things. We decided to check out the sex-education curriculum. "We found out that xPlanned parenthood' is invited to some of the classes to give their point of view, planned Parenthood passed around contraceptives, in a co-ed environment of 15-16 year olds, explaining in 340 full detail the pros and cons giving the children the idea that promiscuity is okay as long as you're being responsible about it by using contraceptives. I do not feel it is right to teach contraceptives to 15-16 year olds; nor to have boys and girls together. It removes some of their natural modesty. They receive enough of this from the media.

With the sexual immorality of our country now

producing a "deadly disease' - AIDSf the only surefire answer is abstinence. There are so many physical risks of sex: pregnancy, sex diseases, cervical cancer. There are also the psychological risks: feelings of guilt, self-hatred, fear, low self-esteem which can lead to emotional problems for a lifetime or possible suicide.

"I love my children, and I want to know what's being programmed into their minds. This will influence them throughout their lifetime. I want to be a partner in helping develop healthy attitudes about their sexuality. I want to know that my morals and values are not undermined. Parents and teachers should work together. It should be a privilege and responsibility of both of us to mold these pliable minds. We need this bill passed so it can be reality. Please vote for it. "After experiencing going into the schools, and realizing that our efforts were mostly in vain, and 341 accomplishing very little without the protection of this bill, we now see its dire necessity. We met with teachers and school personnel, who advised us that we would be receiving a complete outline of the curriculum, and that we would be invited to be a part of an advisory committee. Neither offer materialized. "We were told that the advisory committee would include 2 parents, 2 members of the clergy, and the educators. When no parents were contacted, we called the school and were told that each of the six teachers has certain objectives to be achieved, and each teacher may use his/her own resources, materials, agencies, etc. that may be valuable to him/her teaching. Many of our educators may be liberals. Where does that leave us? I as a parent am not willing to let this important subject totally in the hands of the educators.

"As to the outline, none of us received a single thing. We called the school again this year to follow up and ask for a detailed synopsis. Again, we were told that the teachers would be free to make their own choices and we should just trust them. No detailed outlines will be sent home - so even though we can, on paper, have a child taken out to be sent to the library, we will not be given any information on which to make a decision. 342 "Since most children will not come home and tell you all about the extra resource material that they are receiving, we will never know for sure what our child is learning. With all the physical and psychological problems involved with pre-marital sex, and with AIDS so rampant, we must have access to all input given to our children. We will only be reassured of that if we have Bill 2277 passed. Fortunately, what is moral is healthy. Therefore there should be no conflict of values in teaching a health course.

"I thank you very much for this opportunity to present my testimony. "Rena Patrick, R.D. 5, Box 5375, Stroudsburg, PA 18360." CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled witness is Mr. John Fitzpatrick, and he too is not present and has asked that we make his testimony a part of the record, and Ann-Marie, I'll give this to you. (The following is the submitted prepared testimony of John Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers.) "The Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers is concerned that House Bill 2277 excludes teacher participation in the formulation of the sex-education curriculum. Once again some members of the Assembly have 343 ignored the subject-area specialists, the instructional leaders who really make the curriculum work. This is most disheartening in light of the fact that the Federation has negotiated many contracts in recent years across the state in which teachers are involved in the decision-making process, in which teachers are treated as true professionals. This new respect for the competency of teachers is further reflected in new career teacher salary levels, and new responsibilities for teacher professionals. Yet, House Bill 2277 ignores this new respect. "PaFT President Al Fondy will elaborate on the position of the Federation in his testimony at Gateway High School on October 15, 1988." CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Jennifer Morales, from Allentown, PA. MS. MORALES: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Before you begin, let me also note that we have received testimony from another individual who was not scheduled to testify but does wish to submit written remarks, and that is Mr. Richard j.

Daily, from Pottstown, PA. (See index for statement from Mr. Dailey.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Now we'll proceed with our witness, Jennifer Morales. Jennifer. 344 MS. MORALES: Good evening, and thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you. I'd just like to say for the record, I've never seen a masturbation movie in any of my sex education classes. My name is Jennifer Morales. I'm a senior at Allen High School in Allentown, Pennsylvania. I am here to testify that sex education is necessary in the school curriculum. The way to get the correct facts across is through trained teachers. Many times it is impossible to talk to your parents, especially if you are a young woman in a single-parent household and the parent just happens to be the father. Sex education teaches responsibility for both sexes. It does not teach how to have sex. Most teenagers learn about sex way before their sex education classes. Teenagers learn about sex from streets, peers, movies, magazines and books. Obviously, these are not the forums in which teenagers or children should be learning about sex and responsible safe practices regarding sexual activities. In my opinion, sex education is needed to be taught long before one reaches high school. Kids are growing up much faster these days. House Bill 2277, also known as the Parent and Pupil Protection Act, is not protecting anyone if it does not allow students to learn 345 correctly about their bodies and how they function. One of the sections of this bill I find disturbing is Section 2505-A, the section concerning need for parental permission to enroll a student in the class. Students do not need permission to have sex, so why do they need permission to learn about it? Think of the mature teenagers who know what they want and what classes they'd like to take, but their parents think differently. We are taught to think on our own, but we can't. Again, we go back to the fact that many teens cannot talk to their parents, perhaps because of differing opinions. It is easier to talk to a trained objective instructor. In my school, we have a nursery with 15 babies enrolled plus a waiting list. For those 15-plus mothers, sex education was just too late.

Sex education is basically a responsibility course. If you cannot talk with your parents and you don't have sex education, where do you go? You go to your friends. And what are your friends doing? your friends are having sex because it's the thing to do. We need sex education to prevent kids from having kids and to understand what kind of health risks we may be taking. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Jennifer. I appreciate you taking the time. I told a young lady 346 earlier today and another young lady last Friday that we especially appreciate hearing from students. We hear from too few of you as we have hearings on different subjects, so your testimony is most relevant.

BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Morales) Q. Have you been in the Allentown School District for your entire career, school career? A. No. I was born in Easton, Pennsylvania, so I was there till fifth grade, and then when I was in sixth grade I moved to Allentown. Q. When did, as far as you can remember and as far as you recognized it, when did you first have anything that related to sex ed in terms of your schooling? A. I think it was when I was in sixth grade. It must have been in middle school. Yeah, sometime in middle school was when I first had a first class. Q. And at that point you were in the Allentown School District? A. Yes. Q. And have you had other sex education related discussions or materials or courses in subsequent grades? A. You mean above middle school? Q. Yes. Any in high school? A. Yes. I have a parenting class and we talk 347

about all kinds of things in there, you know. It has to

deal with children and how they become — responsibility. They teach you responsibility and what kind of things that we have going on in our school, because we have a lot of pregnant teens in our school. Q. As you've had the sex education related materials or courses from sixth grade on up, have you recognized that there's a different approach used and perhaps a different level of sophistication as you've gotten older and as the courses have been directed at older students? Or did you learn the same thing in the 6th grade that you learned in the 12th grade? A. Well, I don't have like a sex ed class now. I had one when I was in ninth grade, that was a health class that we had sex education in there. It was basically the same thing, you know. They told us this is the reproductive system. It was basically the same thing , you know. Q. Is there a big issue about this question in your school district? Are there students objecting or parents objecting? A. A lot of my friends didn't know about this and then I told them what I was doing and they were like, "If they stop sex education, you know, what are the kids going to do?" My friends, you know, who are still in 348 high school and they see that we have a lot of pregnant teens now but they want to learn. They don't want this opportunity to learn more about yourself taken away. Q. Is there — I really didn't make my question clear but I'm glad you misunderstood me and answered that way. A. Okay. Q. The question I intended to ask was, is there much controversy or discussion in your district about the issue of sex education being available or parenting programs being available or are such things generally accepted?

A. I think it's accepted. I mean, for the parenting class, most of my friends have taken the class. You know, it's an elective. You can just take it if you want to. And they want to learn more about being a parent and we talk, you know, about a whole variety of things, so it's not just, you know, children that we're talking about. There's a bunch of different classes you can take, too. Like there's an adult living class you can take. I haven't had that myself, but the same teacher teaches it, so I'm sure it's like kind of the same kind of class. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Any other questions? (No response.) 349 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much, and thank you, along with the others, for sticking with us through today. MS. MORALES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: There being no further witnesses, we've concluded today's agenda. Let me remind those who remain that we have one additional hearing which is scheduled on this subject for Friday, October 14th. That will be at the high school auditorium in the Gateway School District in Monroeville in Allegheny County. There being no further business today, we will adjourn this hearing. Thank you. (Whereupon, the proceedings were concluded at 5:15 p.m.) 350

I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me during the hearing of the within cause, and that this is a true and correct transcript of the same.

Surtax ANN-MARIE P. SWEENEY

The foregoing certification does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.

Ann-Marie P. Sweeney 536 Orrs Bridge Road Camp Hill, PA 17011

1