KANSASKansas received $1,760,378 in federal funds for Kansas Sexuality Education Law and Policy The Kansas Health Education Standards require that each local board of education provide “a complete program of abstinence until marriage in human sexuality that is developmentally appropriate, including information about sexually transmitted diseases, especially HIV/AIDS.” The Standards also state that this program must be medically accurate and research-based, and must “include factual information regarding contraception and disease prevention.” Kansas law does not require parental permission for students to participate in sexuality or HIV/AIDS education nor does it say whether parents or guardians may remove their children from such classes. In March 2006, however, the State Board changed its Standards to recommend that local school districts develop procedures by which parents or guardians may give permission “for students to participate in sexuality education” by returning a consent form. This is referred to as an “opt-in” policy. School districts are not required to follow this recommendation. See Kansas Administrative Regulation 91-31-32, and Kansas Health Education Standards. Recent Legislation Abstinence Plus Education Act Introduced Bill Requires Instruction on Fetal Development; Emergency Contraception as a Form of Abortion Kansas Board of Education Grapples with Sexuality Education The guidelines were not a mandate and districts could still choose a more comprehensive program or an opt-out policy. Opt-out policies allow children to be removed from sexuality education upon the request of a parent. Such policies typically provide notification to parents about what will be taught in their child’s sexuality education program, including what curriculum is used and who will be teaching the class. Students are automatically enrolled in class unless parents request otherwise. Opt-out systems ensure that parents are informed about their child’s sexuality education classes and that a system is in place to allow them to remove their child from the class without penalty to the young person. The overwhelming majority of states have opt-out policies. Under an opt-in policy, schools need permission from parents before students can attend the class. Educators fear, however, that some young people may be unable to gain active consent from their parents and that others will simply forget to do so. Only three states, Arizona, Nevada, and Utah, require active parental permission for sexuality education. Health professionals and parents in the state, however, expressed concern about the possible impact of the 2006 guidelines which they felt would limit the likelihood that students would receive sexuality education.2 In part because of decisions like this, the make up of the board changed radically during the last election with moderates now in the majority. The new board has altered many of the policies put in place by the previous conservative board. In May 2007, the Kansas Board of Education voted to adopt new guidelines that no longer ask teachers to stress abstinence until marriage and leave the question of permission slips to district officials.3 Like the previous draft, these guidelines are not a mandate. Task Force Recommends New Sexuality Education Curriculum School Superintendent Approves GSA The GSA, called the Union of Straight and Alternative Lifestyles in Leavenworth (USALL), received school approval to celebrate “National Coming Out Day” on October 11, 2006. The observance was met with mixed reactions. Some teachers wore pink triangles to show their support of the day. However, some parents were enraged that they did not receive notification of the event and, at school board meetings, voiced their objections to homosexuality, calling it morally and religiously wrong. Kline Continues to Attack Reproductive Health Care Services In his attempt to justify the right to access these medical records, Kline claimed that he was pursuing a “search for evidence of crimes, including possible violations of laws limiting late-term abortions and requiring mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse.”8 Kansas law currently states that it is illegal for those under 16 years of age to engage in sexual activity. Kline broadly interpreted this to mean that all health care providers and counselors must report any “under-age” sexual activity, even if both minors are the same age and have equally consensual interactions. Under Kline’s opinion, any professional who failed to report these minors would face misdemeanor charges of up to six months in jail and a fine of $1,000.9 Representatives for the clinics, however, say that Kline’s argument regarding suspected child abuse held little merit, as two-thirds of the records in question were those of adult women.10 Kline’s desired monitoring of sexual activity of minors would, in effect, decrease minors’ access to essential reproductive health services. Kansas teens claimed that this requirement would not change their sexual behavior but would rather inhibit them from seeking health services that would prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. One 16-year-old girl said, “I would continue having sex. I just wouldn’t be on birth control.”11 To combat Kline’s request, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) filed a lawsuit against Kline’s opinion, stating that this requirement would prevent some girls from seeking and receiving necessary medical attention. In April 2006, a federal judge ruled for CRR, confirming that Kline could not force health care providers and counselors to report “under-age” sexual activity.12 Additionally, in August 2005, Kline filed a lawsuit against Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius (D) and two other state officials to try to block the state from funding abortion services for Medicaid beneficiaries. Federal Medicaid law mandates that states receiving Medicaid funding offer abortions in cases of rape, incest, and when the woman’s life is in danger. However, Kline insisted that life begins at conception and therefore the state is violating an individual’s right to life by funding abortions. On January 24, 2006, a Kansas state court judge ruled that since Kansas participates in the federal Medicaid program, the state must comply with all federal Medicaid laws and regulations. Kline’s lawsuit was dismissed.13 In November 2006, Paul Morrison defeated Phill Kline to become the state’s new attorney general. Kansas Hate Group Teaches Lesson of Tolerance Concerned citizens in Westboro’s home town of Topeka, KS are actively challenging Phelp’s group. Several local organizations formed to fight the Westboro Baptist Church, including “Concerned Citizens for Topeka.” The group is bringing together a diverse coalition of Topeka residents, including local politicians and clergy, to fight the messages of hate emanating from Westboro’s members. Members of the Topeka community also showed their opposition to the church’s platform when they voted overwhelmingly against Jael Phelps, a granddaughter of Rev. Phelps, in the nonpartisan primary for city council in March 2005. Phelps ran against councilwoman Tiffany Muller, the first openly gay officeholder in Kansas. Muller was ultimately defeated in the election by attorney Richard Harmon. The Topeka community also voted against a Phelps’ family campaign to repeal an ordinance that prohibits the city from discriminating against gays in hiring. If it had passed, the repeal measure would have banned the Council from passing any ordinances specifically protecting gay and lesbian individuals for 10 years. Fred Phelps’ campaign of hatred may be having the reverse effect. In fact, many people in the Topeka community spoke of their support for gay rights and explicitly reference their position as opposed to Westboro’s. Debra Goodrich, an opponent of the repeal measure, said, “It’s almost as if the gay rights people had hired Fred. He’s so galvanized the community for gay rights.” Mark Potok, of the Southern Poverty Law Center agreed. “I thank Fred Phelps for teaching Topeka about tolerance. He has done more for teaching tolerance than anyone in the history of Kansas,” he said.16 Kansas’s Youth: Statistical Information of Note17
Title V Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding In Fiscal Year 2006, the Kansas Department of Health and the Environment (KDHE) offered specialty and promotional items to their sub-grantees for distribution among participants in local Title V-funded programs. These items include pens, wristbands, kickballs, and stadium cups that feature several slogans from KDHE abstinence programs including, “The first time only happens once—wait for the right time,” “ICanW8-CanU?,” and “Ugot2W8.” Each item also included the phone number for KDHE’s hotline. KDHE also contributes ads and articles on topics related to abstinence to a semiannual magazine that is distributed to schools and other organizations across the state by the Kansas Radio Network. KDHE uses a portion of its Title V funds to conduct pre- and post- tests with the students reached by the local programs that sub-grantees run. A formal evaluation of the Kansas Abstinence Education Program was performed by Doren Fredrickson, MD, PhD, with the University of Kansas, School of Medicine. (See the Title V evaluation section for more information.) The majority of the state’s Title V funding is distributed to nine sub-grantees. Sub-grantees include Abstinence Education, Inc. (formerly known as Abstinence Education Consultants, Inc.), Catholic Community Services, Community Health Organization Committee, Flint Hills Community Health Center, GPT-Local Area Network, Johnson County Health Department, Olathe School District, S.A.F.E.–Sexuality and Family Education, and Ulysses School District (USD-214). Sub-grantees use a variety of curricula, including Choosing the Best; Family Accountability Communicating Teen Sexuality ( FACTS); Me, My World, My Future; WAIT Training,and locally developed curricula. All sub-grantees target young people ages 15–17, although some programs offer services to young people ages 15 and under. The sub-grantees must follow all eight tenets of the federal definition of “abstinence education.” SIECUS reviewed Choosing the Best LIFE and found that it names numerous physical and psychological consequences of premarital sexual activity, suggests that sexually active teens will never have happy futures, and implies that only teens with low self-esteem and poor judgment become sexually active. For example, Choosing the Best LIFE states that “relationships often lower the self-respect of both partners—one feeling used, the other feeling like the user. Emotional pain can cause a downward spiral leading to intense feelings of lack of worthlessness (sic).”19 SIECUS reviewed Choosing the Best PATH and found that it provides endless information on the negative consequences of premarital sexual activity and utilizes a variety of tactics to suggest that teens should feel guilty, embarrassed, and ashamed of sexual behavior. For example, Choosing the Best PATH asks students: “How does being sexually active as a teen affect how a person feels about himself or herself?” The suggested answer is: “Can feel sad about losing virginity, loss of self-respect, blames self for getting pregnant or contracting an STD.” It goes on to say, “Sexual activity also can lead to the trashing of a person’s reputation, resulting in the loss of friends.”20 SIECUS reviewed FACTS and found that, in order to convince students to remain abstinent until marriage, it provides incomplete and inaccurate medical information; presents opinions and beliefs as universal truths; and portrays a biased view of gender, marriage, family structure, sexual orientation, and pregnancy options. For example, FACTS includes as the negative consequences of premarital sex:
FACTS also includes the following as an emotional consequence of sex: “You know people talk about you behind your back because you’ve had sex with so many people. It so empty too (sic). Finally you get sick of it all and attempt suicide.”21 One sub-grantee, Catholic Community Services, offers several community services for adults and teenagers including “pregnancy counseling, post-abortion counseling, and abstinence education.”22 GPT-Local Area Network (www.gptchurch.org) is the abstinence-only-until-marriage affiliate of the Greater Pentecostal Temple in Kansas City, KS. GPT’s address is the same as the Greater Pentecostal Temple. GPT, which describes itself as “a faith-based non-profit,” operates a program called “Family Academy Abstinence Education” whose goal is “to persuade Kansas teenagers to be abstinent from sexual activity outside of marriage by educating them on the benefits of an ‘abstinent life-style.’” “Family Academy” offers classroom instruction, drama, family support groups, contests, and community outreach. GPT also frequently offers a “realistic parenting” component at the same time as the young people’s program. In 2003–04, the drama portion of this program included a play with an abstinence-only until message written by Lori Stubbs, author of the book Wonderfully and Fearfully Made, which was performed at schools in the Wyandotte County area. According to its Department of Health and Human Services “Communities Served” forms, which were obtained through an Open Records request, GPT provided abstinence information in a number of different settings, including the United Methodist Church in Kansas City, the Wyandotte Boys and Girls Club, Kansas City Kansas public schools, the Kansas City, Kansas Community College Regional Prevention Center, the Kansas City Chamber of Commerce, the Argentine Community Center, and a women’s center. Most of the programs were offered in eight-session classes. Greater Pentecostal Temple invited Cee Cee Michaela, an evangelist and abstinence speaker, to speak to its members.23 On her website, Michaela lists GPT as one of the churches where she “shared her awesome testimony and sang her song ‘So Much Luv,’ which is about the moment she accepted Christ into her life.” Her website goes on to say that Michaela “has presented her Godzgirl ‘Purity’ Session at many of these churches as well!” Included on her list of services are etiquette and abstinence services, purity pajama parties, and purity ring ceremonies.24 From GPT’s website, it is unclear if GPT used its Title V funds to support Michaela’s services. Title V Evaluation Kansas evaluated its Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage program in 2004. Five of the six abstinence-only-until-marriage sub-grantees participated in the survey. Students responded to pre- and post-test questions about their attitudes relating to abstinence such as “I will be healthier, happier, and more accepted if I wait until I’m married to have sex” and “I feel comfortable saying ‘no’ to sex.”25 Results revealed that there were “no changes noted for participants’ actual or intended behavior; such as whether they planned to wait until marriage to have sex.”26 The evaluation did reveal negative changes in attitudes; students surveyed were less likely to respond that the teachers and staff cared about them and significantly fewer students responded that they felt they “have the right to refuse to have sex with someone” following participation in an abstinence-only-until-marriage program.27 Researchers concluded that, “rather than focusing on abstinence-only-until-marriage, data suggests that including information on contraceptive use may be more effective at decreasing teen pregnancies.”28 Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) and Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) Grantees Abstinence Education Consultants, Inc.’s website also features the video “Abstinence is the Solution.” The narrator of this video states, “Sex between teenagers is ripping away at the very fabric of our society.”31 The Haven Center, Inc., a community center in Walker, KS, provides abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for kids. As part of its Ignite L.A.P.S. (Leadership and Abstinence for Positive Lifestyles) program, it confirms that “youth participate in a ceremony that empower [sic] them to make healthy choices and encourages them to commit to abstinence until marriage.”32 Research has found that under certain conditions, such public commitments, most commonly called virginity pledges, may help some adolescents delay sexual intercourse. When they work, pledges help this select group of adolescents delay the onset of sexual intercourse for an average of 18 months—far short of marriage. Researchers found that pledges only worked when taken by a small group of students. Pledges taken by a whole class were ineffective. More importantly, the studies also found that those young people who took a pledge were one-third less likely to use contraception when they did become sexually active than their peers who had not pledged. These teens are therefore more vulnerable to the risks of unprotected sexual activity, such as unintended pregnancy and STDs, including HIV/AIDS. Further research has confirmed that although some students who take pledges delay intercourse, ultimately they are just as likely to contract an STD as their non-pledging peers. The study also found that the STD rates were higher in communities where a significant proportion (over 20%) of the young people had taken virginity pledges.33 Federal and State Funding for Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs in FY 2006
Title V Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Coordinator
Kansas Organizations that Support Comprehensive Sexuality Education
Kansas Organizations that Oppose Comprehensive Sexuality Education
Newspapers in Kansas
References
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home |
Publications |
Support SIECUS |
Links |
About SIECUS |
Site Navigation |
Search |
Donate |
Contact Us
Policy & Advocacy |
Media |
International |
Library |
Youth Development |
School Health Education Clearinghouse
copyright ©
1996-2007, SIECUS
Web Master: siecus@siecus.org
Print