After reading more and more abstinence-only insanity, I thought I'd go a step beyond my previous post on my approach to sex ed and do a sample curriculum.
Topic: Sex is for consenting adults
Discuss the meaning of the term "consent".
Have students look up laws in various jurisdictions on sexual assault/rape, including statutory rape/age of consent.
Have student read case law on the topic, including the recent Supreme Court of Canada case
Discuss how one's partner needs to be awake and reasonably sober to give valid consent.
Discuss how consent is an ongoing process, not a one-shot deal, and that it can be revoked at any time.
Have students look up rules of professional discipline for certain professions, and discuss concept of relationships involving imbalance of power or trust which make it impossible to have valid consent. In other words - psychiatrists cannot date patients, ever.
Discuss good touch/bad touch.
Discuss fact that kids can always tell parents, teachers, doctors or another trusted adult if someone is hurting them or doing something to them that makes them uncomfortable. Do NOT keep a secret just because someone tells you that you cannot tell anyone - in fact, that's a sign that you should tell an adult. If they are scared to tell a parent, it is always ok to talk to a teacher, doctor or school counselor instead. Teachers, doctors and counselors are required by law to help you. If one doesn't help, you can tell someone else. If someone says that something bad will happen if you tell, do not believe them, and tell someone right away. You will not get in trouble for being honest. If you are ever worried about something, there is always an adult who is ready and willing to listen to you.
Discuss how hormone surges in adolescence affect mood and behavior
Research how development of frontal cortex of the brain is not complete until early 20s, and how that affects risk-taking
Have students do detailed life-plans, based on having children at 15, 20, 25, and 30. Life-plans should include educational plan, future career options and salaries, childcare arrangements, budgeting, etc.
Topic: Sex needs to be safe
Research various STDs, their modes of transmission, and what we know about how to prevent transmission. Highlight how recommendations may differ from one disease to another. Include ALL methods of transmission. Give practical instruction on how to prevent transmission (condoms, dental dams, etc.), where to obtain items, and things to avoid (such as nonoxynyl-9 or Vaseline).
Provide information on clinics that do testing, and on accuracy of testing.
Role-play discussion to have with potential partner about safe sex and doing testing.
Refer back to Topic 1, and discuss risks associated with lack of sobriety. Also discuss risk of being slipped "date rape" drugs and ways to minimize risk.
Give information on rape crisis centres and shelters for anyone being abused. Mention that violence isn't always man on woman - it can occur the other way, or in same-sex relationships, and it is always too serious to ignore.
Discuss no-risk and lower-risk activities. Also discuss risks that may be present with various forms of sexual activity.
Emphasize that pain is a problem which should not be ignored.
Topic: Babies need parents who are prepared to care for them
Have students job-shadow a family lawyer or child protection worker, or at least interview them about their work.
Research child support laws.
Research how factors such as alcohol or drug use, poor nutrition or use of certain medications in utero are related to various lifelong medical issues. Discuss the importance of proper prenatal care and pre-pregnancy planning.
Research how parenting impacts children.
Research the impact of parental conflict on children. Discuss how relationships between couples may end, but that you and your child will be tied forever to your child's other parent - for better or worse.
Brainstorm desirable qualities to seek in the person who will be the mother/father of your child.
Provide a list of local public health/birth control clinics, with complete contact information and hours.
Do a comprehensive review of all birth control methods, including proper usage, risks and failure rates. Explain how to access each method of birth control.
Do a math exercise on probability, and the effect of using more than one method of birth control on probability.
Read "Taking Charge of Your Fertility".
Role-play discussions about delaying sex, and about using proper birth control.
Discuss full impact of an unplanned pregnancy on life plans (see Topic 1)
Discuss option for women if faced with unwanted pregnancy (services for teen moms, adoption options, foster care kinship placement, laws against pregnancy discrimination, financial supports available, Plan B, abortion options and side effects).
Discuss fact that men have very limited control over what happens with a pregnancy, and what legal obligations and options exist after the birth.
Topic: Your body
Provide some decent books on puberty, anatomy, hygiene and reproduction
Discuss the full spectrum of what is normal
Point out signs of what may not be normal, discuss breast/testicular self-exam
Discuss body image and self-esteem
Topic: Functional and Dysfunctional Relationships
Provide role models for healthy relationships (obviously, something that goes a bit beyond a mere health class)
Read "How to Talk So Your Kids Will Listen and Listen So that Your Kids Will Talk", and work through the examples. Get into pairs or small groups and work on constructive vs. destructive communication. Discuss "I" vs. "You" statements, avoiding words like always or never, avoiding negative labels, expressing feelings and doing active listening.
Group discussion about respect.
Group discussion about love (being committed to someone else and wanting to do what's best for them) vs. lust
Workshop on negative relationship patterns and how to avoid them
Observation of healthy co-parenting relationships, and discussion of expectations for the other parent
Workshop and discussion on abuse and control - physical, verbal, emotional, financial
Guest speaker (police, lawyer, social worker) on identifying potential sources of physical danger (violence, threats, serious uncontrolled mental illness, serious substance abuse), and options for safely dealing with the situation (use and limits of restraining orders, shelters, criminal law, etc.)
Range of sexuality, current legal issues/status and services for the LGBT community
Monday, April 9, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Post-Holocaust Anti-Nazism Theology
As someone born to a Jewish family 26 years after the Holocaust, the Holocaust wasn't just a historical event. It was this dominant theme that colored every discussion and moral lesson. Growing up, this was completely normal to me. More recently, I've met people in person and online who weren't raised this way, and I've found myself explaining things that look like contradictions to outsiders. I've also noticed parallels between Christian religious paintings depicting hell, and images of the Holocaust.
Image of sinners going to hell:
Holocaust images (graphic):
So, I've toyed with the idea that in some ways, the reaction to the Holocaust had actually morphed into its own theology.
What are the major tenets of this theology?
1. Evil = Nazis, Devil = Hitler, Hell = Holocaust
This would be the #1 principle, from which all else derives.
If something resembled Nazis, Hitler and/or the Holocaust, it was bad. This was true for the obvious examples of atrocities, like the Rwandan genocide. It was also true for things that others may view as neutral or even positive, if there was a connection to Nazis in any way. So, if Eichmann had claimed that he was "just following orders", then it must be that obedience to authority was bad.
2. Good is defined as whatever is in opposition to Nazism.
Nazis wanted to kill Jews, so Jews were good.
Nazis killed people with disabilities, so working for disability rights was good.
Nazis sent homosexuals to concentration camps, so gay rights were good.
3. A moral dilemna is what happens when two things that Hitler opposed also oppose each other.
Nazis opposed free speech and the ability to demonstrate freely, so the proposed march by neo-Nazis in Skokie provoked intense division and debate in the community.
Nazis were against both Orthodox Judaism and homosexuals, so it's not unheard of for some of the same people to go to Orthodox synagogues and the gay pride parade.
4. G-d is a fuzzier, more problematic concept in this theology. On one hand, the simplistic idea of a G-d who is All-Powerful AND All-Good AND who personally runs the world AND who punishes the bad and rewards the good gets a real beating. On the other hand, the Nazis were against G-d, so G-d must be good and the Nazis cannot be allowed to win on this point.
Elie Wiesel has described this paradox, in which rabbis in a concentration camp put G-d on trial:
The trial lasted several nights. Witnesses were heard, evidence was gathered, conclusions were drawn, all of which issued finally in a unanimous verdict: the Lord God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, was found guilty of crimes against creation and humankind. And then, after what Wiesel describes as an "infinity of silence," the Talmudic scholar looked at the sky and said "It's time for evening prayers," and the members of the tribunal recited Maariv, the evening service.
Image of sinners going to hell:
Holocaust images (graphic):
So, I've toyed with the idea that in some ways, the reaction to the Holocaust had actually morphed into its own theology.
What are the major tenets of this theology?
1. Evil = Nazis, Devil = Hitler, Hell = Holocaust
This would be the #1 principle, from which all else derives.
If something resembled Nazis, Hitler and/or the Holocaust, it was bad. This was true for the obvious examples of atrocities, like the Rwandan genocide. It was also true for things that others may view as neutral or even positive, if there was a connection to Nazis in any way. So, if Eichmann had claimed that he was "just following orders", then it must be that obedience to authority was bad.
2. Good is defined as whatever is in opposition to Nazism.
Nazis wanted to kill Jews, so Jews were good.
Nazis killed people with disabilities, so working for disability rights was good.
Nazis sent homosexuals to concentration camps, so gay rights were good.
3. A moral dilemna is what happens when two things that Hitler opposed also oppose each other.
Nazis opposed free speech and the ability to demonstrate freely, so the proposed march by neo-Nazis in Skokie provoked intense division and debate in the community.
Nazis were against both Orthodox Judaism and homosexuals, so it's not unheard of for some of the same people to go to Orthodox synagogues and the gay pride parade.
4. G-d is a fuzzier, more problematic concept in this theology. On one hand, the simplistic idea of a G-d who is All-Powerful AND All-Good AND who personally runs the world AND who punishes the bad and rewards the good gets a real beating. On the other hand, the Nazis were against G-d, so G-d must be good and the Nazis cannot be allowed to win on this point.
Elie Wiesel has described this paradox, in which rabbis in a concentration camp put G-d on trial:
The trial lasted several nights. Witnesses were heard, evidence was gathered, conclusions were drawn, all of which issued finally in a unanimous verdict: the Lord God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, was found guilty of crimes against creation and humankind. And then, after what Wiesel describes as an "infinity of silence," the Talmudic scholar looked at the sky and said "It's time for evening prayers," and the members of the tribunal recited Maariv, the evening service.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Medical issues
I haven't posted for a while, as my husband has been dealing with a serious medical issue for the past month. I may be able to reflect on it a bit more once it resolves, but right now it's just nerve-wracking and I'm trying to focus on helping him recover and doing the extra work that needs to be done.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Disturbing view of child abuse
http://community.babycenter.com/post/a29429659/possible_trigger_child_abuse_or_deserved_punishment?cpg=61&csi=2359431435&pd=-1
I understand that we are dealing with people who are terrified of the consequences of misbehavior with their children, since they see prison or death as realistic outcomes. They want to do what it takes to change that.
What I don't understand or accept is the methods used. What evidence is there that beating your child, putting him down and basically torturing him will turn him into a good kid and strong student? Absolutely none. They'd be better off using their energy to say, "what works for other groups?" and "what factors are not working for us?".
Yes, I know that all children are different and come with their own challenges. At the same time - I'm a lawyer, my husband is a doctor, his brothers are both doctors, and we went to school with tons of professionals and very few criminals, so I think we've seen what works. Our parents weren't doctors or lawyers, and my in-laws were immigrants with English as their 3rd language and just high school education. We also have kids who do well in school and get great conduct marks. We don't use corporal punishment, foul language or put-downs, and treat our kids with respect.
Aside from dealing with institutional racism, some tried and true methods for success include:
1. Strong role models of decency and success.
2. For boys in particular, strong male role models with positive morals.
3. Raising kids with the constant message that you EXPECT them to do good, and do well. It's not just semantics - there is a real difference between hearing "when you go to university, are you going to study law or medicine?" vs. "if you keep this up (at age 7), you'll land your ass in prison and may end up dead". From personal experience, I can tell you that law schools and med schools are filled with students who were told from birth that they were destined to become professionals.
4. Parents need to be the sort of people that they want their children to become.
5. Parents need to have a rock-solid relationship with their children, so that their children will WANT to follow in their footsteps.
I understand that we are dealing with people who are terrified of the consequences of misbehavior with their children, since they see prison or death as realistic outcomes. They want to do what it takes to change that.
What I don't understand or accept is the methods used. What evidence is there that beating your child, putting him down and basically torturing him will turn him into a good kid and strong student? Absolutely none. They'd be better off using their energy to say, "what works for other groups?" and "what factors are not working for us?".
Yes, I know that all children are different and come with their own challenges. At the same time - I'm a lawyer, my husband is a doctor, his brothers are both doctors, and we went to school with tons of professionals and very few criminals, so I think we've seen what works. Our parents weren't doctors or lawyers, and my in-laws were immigrants with English as their 3rd language and just high school education. We also have kids who do well in school and get great conduct marks. We don't use corporal punishment, foul language or put-downs, and treat our kids with respect.
Aside from dealing with institutional racism, some tried and true methods for success include:
1. Strong role models of decency and success.
2. For boys in particular, strong male role models with positive morals.
3. Raising kids with the constant message that you EXPECT them to do good, and do well. It's not just semantics - there is a real difference between hearing "when you go to university, are you going to study law or medicine?" vs. "if you keep this up (at age 7), you'll land your ass in prison and may end up dead". From personal experience, I can tell you that law schools and med schools are filled with students who were told from birth that they were destined to become professionals.
4. Parents need to be the sort of people that they want their children to become.
5. Parents need to have a rock-solid relationship with their children, so that their children will WANT to follow in their footsteps.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Interesting study on distinctiveness of Jewish attitudes in America
http://www.ajc.org/atf/
cf/{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}
/JewishDistinctivenessAmerica_TS_April2005.pdf
The study's findings, for the most part, weren't exactly a huge surprise for me. Seeing it organized in this way, however, prompted an "Aha!" moment.
It's becoming common in Orthodox Jewish circles to dismiss liberal values (such as equality and commitment to civil rights) held by non-Orthodox Jews as simply another symptom of their assimilation into the outside secular society. The image used is one of poor lost Jewish souls, adrift from their spiritual heritage, who didn't know any better and got led astray by the non-Jewish world.
I could give lots of examples of this thinking, but this blog post is a good illustration.
What the data shows, however, is that embracing liberal values is NOT something that American Jews do in order to assimilate into the mainstream. To the contrary, these values - while they may not be the current values of right-wing Orthodoxy - are actually a distinctive feature of the Jewish community in general. Ironically, the social values of right-wing Orthodoxy are actually a step closer to those of non-Jewish Americans.
cf/{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}
/JewishDistinctivenessAmerica_TS_April2005.pdf
The study's findings, for the most part, weren't exactly a huge surprise for me. Seeing it organized in this way, however, prompted an "Aha!" moment.
It's becoming common in Orthodox Jewish circles to dismiss liberal values (such as equality and commitment to civil rights) held by non-Orthodox Jews as simply another symptom of their assimilation into the outside secular society. The image used is one of poor lost Jewish souls, adrift from their spiritual heritage, who didn't know any better and got led astray by the non-Jewish world.
I could give lots of examples of this thinking, but this blog post is a good illustration.
What the data shows, however, is that embracing liberal values is NOT something that American Jews do in order to assimilate into the mainstream. To the contrary, these values - while they may not be the current values of right-wing Orthodoxy - are actually a distinctive feature of the Jewish community in general. Ironically, the social values of right-wing Orthodoxy are actually a step closer to those of non-Jewish Americans.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Bad internet parenting advice
http://www.takingchildrenseriously.com/carseat_in_a_medical_emergency
I wish this was a joke. It's not.
Did I ever mention that my first child protection trial involved a baby who suffered broken ribs when the car was struck IN A PARKING LOT?
I wish this was a joke. It's not.
Did I ever mention that my first child protection trial involved a baby who suffered broken ribs when the car was struck IN A PARKING LOT?
Friday, August 19, 2011
Cute kid-ism with a Biblical reference
2 years ago, I mentioned to my kids that the Dead Sea Scrolls special exhibit would be coming to a museum near us in the fall.
Before we went to the exhibit, we took a family trip to Israel. While there, we went for a hike in the Ein Gedi nature reserve, located near the shore of the Dead Sea. Along the trail, we noticed numerous rock hyraxes, on trees and rocks.
So, what did my then-6 year old daughter say?
"Look, Mommy! It's the Dead Sea Squirrels!"
Before we went to the exhibit, we took a family trip to Israel. While there, we went for a hike in the Ein Gedi nature reserve, located near the shore of the Dead Sea. Along the trail, we noticed numerous rock hyraxes, on trees and rocks.
So, what did my then-6 year old daughter say?
"Look, Mommy! It's the Dead Sea Squirrels!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)