#

Hanover school board chairman Ben Keeney confirms that his district is using the curriculum that involves teachers encouraging five-year-olds to draw their own naked bodies. But, he assured NHJournal, no parents are complaining.

“I’ve not heard from any parents about the situation directly,” Keeney said.

Care for Kids is taught at the Bernice Ray Elementary School through a partnership with WISE and has been part of Hanover’s curriculum for over a dozen years, Keeney said. Keeney said the goal of the program is to prevent abuse.

“It’s a sexual violence prevention tool,” he said.

WISE, a Lebanon-based non-profit to support victims of domestic and sexual abuse, has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

The Care for Kids program presented as an anti-abuse teaching tool, sparked an uproar when an Upper Valley parent, Chris Rivet, read from the graphic teaching aid during testimony at the State House. Rivet said he and his wife were never told about the content before it was offered. State law dictates parents be given notice before any sex education being offered in schools.

Care for Kids has teachers instruct children to draw themselves naked and encourages teachers to push children who are uncomfortable to draw penises, nipples, and other body parts.

Rivet, a parent and a teacher, said the program is totally inappropriate for the age group. He read from the curriculum on the floor of the New Hampshire House during a hearing on the GOP-backed Parents Bill of Rights.

The bill’s prime sponsor in the Senate, Republican Sharon Carson, said the bill is in response to parents who learned for the first time what their children were being taught in schools while overseeing classwork during the COVID school closures. Those parents were shocked, Carson said.

Another reason for the bill is found in the lawsuit brought by a Manchester mother who was told by school employees they could not tell her the truth about her child’s gender identity.

“Parents shouldn’t have to file lawsuits to find out about their children,” Carson said.

The Care for Kids program, which comes from the organization Prevent Child Abuse VT, is taught throughout Vermont and in some Upper Valley communities in New Hampshire along the Connecticut River under a Healthy Relationships course.

Healthy Relationships is also taught in New Hampshire schools throughout the Monadnock region through the Monadnock Center for Violence Prevention in Keene without mention of the kindergarten naked drawing course. Representatives with MCVP Healthy Relationships program were unavailable for comment.

However, Keeney said the program is getting a review from the school board. That review is part of the regular curriculum review the board conducts and is not in response to any complaints.

“The curriculum as a whole is being looked at by the board as an ongoing, constant improvement project,” Keeney said.

After Chris Rivet testified before the House Education Committee about the troubling, sexualized curriculum offered to his kindergarten-aged son, he was quickly labeled a liar on social media.

But documents shared with NHJournal show the program “Caring for Kids” is very real. The kindergarten curriculum in which adults encourage children to draw genitalia comes from WISE, an Upper Valley nonprofit with a history of putting questionable content into public elementary schools.

Rivet told NHJournal he initially did not want to testify last week about SB 272, the Parents Bill of Rights, because he did not want to deal with people opposed to the measure.

“I dislike how politicized it’s become. People fear speaking out because of the backlash,” Rivet said.

People who support the Parents Bill of Rights were labeled transphobic and “white supremacists” by elected Democrats like Rep. Maria Perez (D-Milford). Though initially hesitant, Rivet said Granite Staters need to know about what’s really going on in schools. So, he went to the State House and read from the “Caring for Kids” teacher’s manual.

“‘Now that we have talked about our bodies and our public and private parts, we are going to do an activity. We are going to trace our bodies, and then you can draw your body just as it looks when you come out of the bathtub or shower,’” Rivet read. “It then goes on, on the second page, to say, ‘If a child is hesitant about drawing, you can gently suggest adding more parts. Can you add your elbows? How about your fingernails? A penis? Another useful approach is to offer to draw for them. Where would you like me to put the nipples?’”

Rivet and his wife immediately saw red flags when they learned about the program, about which parents were not given prior notice.

“I thought, ‘Why does my kid need to learn the word vulva at 5 years old?’” Rivet said.

He asked not to use the name of his child’s school so that his son could avoid harassment.

The curriculum comes from WISE, a nonprofit with a mission to serve survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. WISE representatives did not respond to a request for comment.

The organization took heat in 2018 after it went to schools in Vermont and New Hampshire with a survey asking fifth graders about their sex lives, with questions ranging from gender and sexual identity to the sexual activities they engaged in.

School officials at the Windsor School, for example, were forced to apologize for the WISE-supplied questionnaire, which asked ten-year-old students questions about their romantic and sexual relationships, according to media reports, conducted without parental knowledge or consent.

“To any family involved in this survey, we sincerely apologize,” then-Superintendent David Baker said at the time. “Sometimes, in an effort to do good, people go too far, too fast.”

The aim of classes like the one Rivet objected to is to teach children about bodily integrity as part of a way to combat child sexual abuse. Rivet said it is clear there are good intentions with the class but dangerous execution. The class essentially has adult women coaching young boys on how to draw their own penises. If the gender roles were reversed, with an adult man teaching a 5-year-old girl how to draw her own vagina, most people would see the problem, he said.

“It gets really gross really quickly,” he said.

There are other programs with the same goals that are more age-appropriate, Rivet said. He said the one used by WISE includes inappropriate methods based on junk science. Rivet says he is a science teacher and former scientist. He investigated the program’s evidence-based data and found it wanting.

“The evidence behind the program is comically bad,” Rivet claims.

Rivet is frustrated by how his local school, district, and the state Department of Education responded to his complaint. He does not see parents getting better information about what is happening even if SB 272 becomes law. 

“I don’t have hope anyone will follow the Parents Bill of Rights even if it passes,” he said.

Giving parents notice about sex education classes in public schools is already mandated under New Hampshire law. But the Care for Kids program is being presented under the guise of something along the lines of a social-emotional learning program. 

Rivet says he is a big believer in public education, but felt he has no other choice than to send his son to a private school next year. He has friends who are making similar decisions, and Rivet expects that trend to continue. Enrollment in New Hampshire public schools has been dropping steadily for years.

“In the end, it’s still frustrating,” Rivet said. 

Parents do not have the right to know their middle school children have access to graphic novels that depict children engaged in sex acts and include links to gay dating apps, nor are they allowed to know teachers are urging kindergartners to draw themselves naked.

That was the case New Hampshire Democrats made as they opposed GOP legislation expanding parents’ rights over their kids’ public school experience.

The battle over the Parents’ Bill of Rights took center stage Tuesday with a packed Representatives Hall for the House Education Committee hearing on SB 272. The Senate passed the bill along party lines last month.

A similar House bill sponsored by House Speaker Sherman Packard, HB 10, died in the closely split legislature this year. Packard said the Senate version needs to pass to give parents the final say over their children’s education.

“Parents are responsible for the upbringing of their own children. We support the parents’ right to know what is happening to their child in school. These are our children, not the state’s or the school district’s,” Packard said.

Emotions ran high during several hours of testimony, as Democrats and left-leaning media outlets have characterized the bill as targeting LGBT students.

The bill is designed to address situations like the one in the Manchester school system in which a mother requested information after hearing rumors her child was identifying as a different gender at school. The Manchester district’s policy is to keep that information secret from parents. The mother was forced to sue, and Hillsborough Superior Court Judge Amy Messer upheld the district’s policy directing teachers and staff not to fully and accurately inform parents about their children’s behavior.

Democrats have responded by arguing parents are simply too dangerous to be given the same information about their children that teachers, students, and school staff have.

“What parents are we helping with a bill like this? Not parents who have good relationships with their kids,” Rep. Alicia Gregg (D-Nashua) said Tuesday.

Progressive Rep. Maria Perez (D-Milford) told the bill’s supporters they should be ashamed of themselves. Perez shared her personal tragedy of having grown up in an abusive home and argued that was proof the bill would hurt children.

“I can tell you parents are not always right,” Perez said.

Perez claimed the bill is part of a national movement to harm LGBTQ children and that parents’ rights supporters are enabling hate and white supremacy.

“This language has given white supremacy groups and the Proud Boys the right to come to our communities to be hateful and tries to scare us,” Perez said.

The bill’s main sponsor, Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry), pushed back on the claim the bill is designed to harm gay youth. The bill is a response to what parents learned during the COVID-19 school closures, she said, when many discovered their children were being exposed to sexually inappropriate material as part of public education.

“Many parents became the teachers for their children, and parents were beginning to see what was happening and started raising questions. Unfortunately, parents were shut out and ignored,” Carson said.

Carson said many parents in the state have since learned their school districts have enacted policies that require teachers and staff to lie about a child’s gender identity, as happened in Manchester.

“Those are the types of policies that parents are upset about and that they want changed,” Carson said. “Parents love their children, they care about their children, and they want the best for their children. Schools can’t provide that.”

Former state Senate president and potential 2024 gubernatorial candidate Chuck Morse (R-Salem) testified on behalf of the bill.

“This may seem simple, but it is often overlooked in our education system. Parents should have access to information about their child’s curriculum, as well as any materials or resources that are being used in the classroom. This knowledge is essential to ensure that parents can make informed decisions about their child’s education and can provide the necessary support at home,” Morse said.

Rep. Peter Petrino (D-Milford) claimed the bill would put LGBTQ children in harm’s way, either from abusive parents or self-harm. He said that parents already have legal rights under New Hampshire law, and SB 272 is unnecessary.

And he added that parents should be satisfied with their current ability to file school board complaints, or lawsuits if necessary. Parents should not feel entitled to be told the truth by their children’s teachers.

“No one has the right to compel someone to do something against their will,” Petrino said.

The bill would also give parents the right to see all of the content being taught to their kids, another policy Democrats oppose. Some parents have expressed horror at learning their school library has books available for children that contain graphic sexual content, such as “Gender Queer” and “This Book is Gay.”

When he testified before the committee, Chris Rivet identified himself as a parent and public school teacher. He said he and his wife have been through the system of filing complaints after learning about the social-emotional curriculum offered for five-year-olds. He read from the curriculum, citing a section where teachers urge students to draw themselves naked, including genitalia.

“‘Now that we have talked about our bodies and our public and private parts, we are going to do an activity. We are going to trace our bodies, and then you can draw your body just as it looks when you come out of the bathtub or shower,’” Rivet read.

“Our school is asking our five-year-old children to draw themselves naked, that’s this curriculum. It then goes on, on the second page, to say, ‘If a child is hesitant about drawing, you can gently suggest adding more parts. Can you add your elbows? How about your fingernails? A penis? Another useful approach is to offer to draw for them. Where would you like me to put the nipples?’”

“Would you consider an adult asking a minor to draw themselves naked abuse?” Rivet asked.

Rivet and his wife complained about the curriculum to both local and state education officials, but nothing was done.

“There was no accountability,” Rivet said.

University of New Hampshire students are getting a crash course in all things sex this month, from vulva appreciation seminars, instructions on how to come out with an LGBTQI+ identity, sexual device giveaways, to classes on yoga to increase pleasure.

But it suppresses information about nearby pregnancy crisis centers where women can turn for help if needed.

While intense Sextober festivities, put on by the state school’s Health & Wellness Center, focus on teaching college students how to enjoy having sex, it does not include any basic information on how to handle the natural result.

“It’s not really giving people resources if you’re only telling them about safe sex,” said Katelyn Regan, the head of the UNH Students for Life chapter.

The Sextober schedule includes multiple talks and programs aimed at dealing with abortion in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade. The free classes include instructions on how to obtain abortions and contraceptive services. What is not mentioned is what, if any, support UNH offers to women if they choose to keep their babies, Regan said.

“It can be very frustrating,” Regan said. “They are ignoring that pregnancy only comes from sex.”

The pro-life message generally gets short shrift on campus, according to Regan. The Health & Wellness Department will make referrals to the nearby abortion clinic for students seeking the procedure, but it does not refer pregnant women to the pro-life pregnancy center, which is closer to campus, she said.

In a podcast interview with NHJournal, Regan revealed that the Health and Wellness Center won’t allow students to even post information about crisis pregnancy centers on the same bulletin board covered with material from Planned Parenthood.

“Health and Wellness has refused to let us put up any kind of life-affirming resource materials,” Regan said. “They have a brochure wall, and half of those brochures have a lovely little Planned Parenthood stamp on the bottom of them. They won’t let us.”

The school, in general, offers little support and few services for pregnant students, leaving women with a terrible choice, she said.

“It’s not fair for women to have to choose between having an abortion and continuing their education here,” Regan said. “Right now, there is no support.”

There is hope for change on that front. Regan is working with the college administration to change school policies and make the campus more welcoming for pregnant women who want to continue their studies.

Erika Mantz, UNH’s executive director of media relations, said in an email that pregnant students, and students who are mothers of infants, can request “academic accommodations, extensions on assignments, flexible attendance plans, being able to stand rather than sit or sit rather than stand in classes or labs as needed, getting larger workspaces, addressing graduate student funding and benefits concerns as applicable, unrestricted bathroom breaks, etc.”

“Students can request accommodations through the Civil Rights and Equity Office at UNH,” Mantz said.

The college does not make special housing for women with infants available but instead allows those women and their infants to live on campus subject to the same housing plans as other students, according to Matz. The university has one childcare center available, but Mantz said space is limited. 

“Childcare is not guaranteed as there is only one childcare center on the Durham campus. Infant spots are limited, and unless planned in advance, there is often a waiting list,” Mantz said.

The school does offer space for mothers to nurse their infants or express milk, she said. 

The university requires all full-time students to have health insurance. And the plan offered through UNH does include coverage for pregnancy, according to Mantz. 

“The university Student Health Benefit Plan also provides this pregnancy coverage and parents/families can add their children to this plan,” Mantz said.

As for the Students for Life organization, Regan said she and her fellow pro-lifers are subject to regular harassment and threats of violence when they advocate for life on campus.

“We have had the police called on us a bunch of times,” Regan said.

Setting up a table with literature on campus can be tricky, she said. They are subject to protesters, some of whom get in their faces to shout and scream at them.

“Unfortunately, this is something that happens to us a lot,” Regan said.

The group was even subject to a bomb threat made on a social media app this year, she said.

Last year, one of Regan’s friends was followed from the Students for Life table and nearly assaulted by other students angry about the pro-life message. Regan said police did respond to that call, but they were initially sent to investigate the Students for Life during that incident.

Despite the threat being caught on the school’s surveillance cameras, no one was charged, Regan said.

Students for Life members are careful to have all the necessary campus permits whenever they set up a table or hold an event, she said. The group also now has a solid working relationship with the campus police.

“It is our right for free speech to be there as long as we’re not trespassing,” she said. “Campus police have actually been really great.”

Gov. Chris Sununu signed his second bill since becoming governor on Monday. House Bill 103 requires school districts to provide at least two weeks notice to parents and guardians of course material involving discussion of human sexuality or sex education, and to make course curriculum materials available to parents on request.

“This bipartisan legislation is consistent with my longtime support for measures that further empower parents’ involvement in their child’s education,” Sununu said in a statement. “It is important to let parents know what students are learning and this bill encourages clear and open lines of communication regarding curriculum content in this important area.”

Third time’s a charm for Rep. Victoria Sullivan, R-Manchester, who put forward the same legislation for the past three years. Former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan previously vetoed it.

Sullivan put the bill forward due to a personal experience she had with her 8-year-old son who was shown what she thought was an inappropriate video in class. She wasn’t notified before that the video would be displayed for her child.

“Parents and parent groups throughout the state worked hard to make their voices heard,” Sullivan said in a statement. “Today, I am happy to say, the little guys won. It is a good day for parental rights in New Hampshire. More importantly, it is a good day for New Hampshire’s public school children. I am grateful to the Governor for signing this important piece of legislation into law.”

Supporters say the law gives parents the power to approve of the material their children are being taught at school. Opponents, including the New Hampshire School Boards Association, the New Hampshire School Administrators Association, and the American Civil Liberties Union, say it will create challenges when it comes to teachers leading class discussion in sex education.

“This bill jeopardizes Granite State students’ ability to get the critical information they need to make healthy lifelong choices,” said Kayla Montgomery, director of advocacy and organizing at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. “We are disappointed Governor Sununu who did not listen to the thousands of constituents and experts both in education, public health, and local school administration who opposed this bill.”

The legislation amends existing law, which allows parents or legal guardians to opt their child out of material they find objectionable. Now, schools must give advance parental notice of curriculum materials.

Currently, 22 states and the District of Columbia require school districts to allow parental involvement in sexual education programs. Four states — Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and now New Hampshire — require parental consent before a child can receive instruction.

New Hampshire is ranked as one of the best states for teaching sexual education in schools, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC surveyed schools to ask if health instruction included 16 “critical” sexual education topics, which includes “how to create and sustain healthy and respectful relationships,” “how to obtain condoms,” and the “importance of limiting the number of sexual partners.”

New Hampshire, New Jersey, and New York were the only states to teach all 16 topics in at least 75 percent of schools.

The New Hampshire Democratic Party quickly criticized the governor for signing a bill that makes “it harder for schools to teach sex-ed.”

Instead of passing/signing any economic bills (still at ZERO), Sununu decided to make it harder for schools to teach sex-ed #nhpolitics https://t.co/psJada9UFx

— NH Democratic Party (@NHDems) April 17, 2017

The first bill Sununu signed as governor repealed required permits for concealed carry firearms. Right-to-work legislation failed to make it to his desk, which he would have likely signed, after the measure failed to pass in the House.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.