It’s not easy to talk about sex or sexual education. It is true if you are a high school student, a parent or a minnesota legislator.
The legislators ordered last year an update of state standards for health education in schools, including sex education. The subject, however, remains uncomfortable for many, and obtaining an agreement on the new standards turns out to be a challenge.
Here is what you need to know about the state of sex education in schools and why the change will not be easy.
1) Current Minnesota standards gain a “F”
The standards of sexual health education in Minnesota are quite fundamental with the law focused on Abstinence and reduction and prevention of the risk of sexually transmitted diseases and infections.
MPR News helps you refuse noise and build a shared understanding. Show your support for this public resource and stay in trust journalism accessible to everyone.
Current standards do not require instructions on consent, sexual orientation or gender identity and healthy relationships. While the State obtains praise to have a policy, the national group of non -profit sex education Siecus gives minnesota a failing note Regarding content and implementation.
The past efforts of DFL legislators to expand standards are stranded. Recently, representative Sydney Jordan, DFL-minneapolis, presented two bills two consecutive years concerning a complete sexual health education which has both failed.
On a state scale, The data show the majority Minnesota parents want their children to learn about medical health education. A study by the University of Minnesota have found that there is no rural and urban fracture on the need for sexual health education.
The bill adopted last year requires that state-scale health standards be developed and implemented by the 2026-20 school year. This process began in January with a non -partisan committee trained by the Minnesota Ministry of Education which includes students, teachers and community members.
They will not dictate the study program for schools, but hope to establish benchmarks to guide teacher teaching on subjects such as nutrition, alcohol and drugs and sexually transmitted infections, or IST.
2) Local control or on a state scale? Debate on the best path
Most Minnesota parents have long Supported complete education of sexual health For students and minnesota school districts have the power to do more on sex education than what the state needs – and students can withdraw from the program. The question under discussion is now whether it is necessary to require districts on a state scale to do more.
The representative of the Maison du Minnesota, Peggy-Bennett, R-Albert Lea, said that she wanted to leave all health standards in schools to local control.
“When you discuss things like anal sex, oral sex, vaginal sex, masturbation, when to teach these things, when not to do so, which belongs to the local council because it is very wrapped in community values and very wrapped in people’s religious beliefs,” said Bennett, retired educator and co -president of the Chamber’s Education Committee, during a February audience.
Bennett presented an invoice To repeal future health standards on a state scale. Supporters of wider requirements, however, say that local control does not go far enough in many districts and that stifling standards on a state scale will worsen things.
“It is very clear that the reason why we are going to repeal health education standards is due to fear and hatred for sex education,” said Meg Bartlet-Chase, the founder of Honest sex ed minnesotaA new non -profit organization on a state scale, which has a doctorate in educational policy.
She said she wanted to help teachers allow teachers to speak with pupils about sex education in a more precise and accessible way. “Sex education is not like a sexy and fun subject,” she said. “It is education. It’s health. “
3) students, teachers taking the lead
It is not unusual in this kind of debate so that people directly affected feel excluded. Not this time. Students and teachers are part of the standards review group and they express themselves.
During a hearing in the Senate in MarchStephen Chapin, professor of health and physical education in St. James and member of the health standards committee, said that the current law is written with little clarity and encourages “education based on fear”.
Chapin said that he had only two students who opened in the 30 years he had taught sex education.
“Education based on fear focused solely on the abstension of acts that can lead to the spread of STIs is harmful, and below the standards of best practices in terms of health education,” he said. “The language of these laws is important. In the current state of things, the law is not clear and difficult to discern what the state should look like. ”
Rasana Mamdani, 16, another member of the health standards committee, said that even if she had a great experience in her sexual health education, she knows that she is not the same in Minnesota.
She hopes that with new health standards and updating the language of the current law, students as they can make enlightened decisions on their bodies.
“I want young people to feel super safe and well informed about their bodies so that they can make decisions for themselves.” She said. “As young people, we are told a lot to talk to adults and understand it, which, I think, is very important, but it is also very important to me that young people have the information they need. This feeling of being equipped with security when it comes to sexually transmitted infections is something that Minnesota students really seek. ”
4) Which comes next
The committee hopes to end in June with a complete draft of health education standards. The State Education Department will then work until the formatting and modification of the December proposal. It will be examined during the 2025-2026 school year, and it should be implemented in schools from 2026-2027.
Legislators, on the other hand, always shine with the general language around sex education.
Last month, the Minnesota Senate agreed to modify the existing status around education for sexual health by replacing the “technically exact” expression with “medically exact” by describing the facts around what must be taught. The measure also removes the language “until marriage”. He currently lives in the omnibus education bill of the Senate policy.
Despite the political back and forth, Bartlett-Chase expressed his hope that the process of writing new standards will give something positive.
“I could be delusional and persistent and have these conversations with everyone all the time and I will not say that it is not a scary moment for many people with different identities and gender experiences in this world around sexuality, including me, as a queer woman,” she said. “But at the moment, I think there is such a movement for the community and the connection around these subjects that I am afraid, but I hope.”
THE The Minnesota Department of Education website has more information hereThose who are interested can offer comments.