Tim Hudak believes handwashing should not be taught in grade one
And open letter to Tim Hudak
Dear Tim Hudak
Yesterday, quite a number of news sources reported on a piece of campaign literature your party distributed in the Toronto area, where I live.
When asked about your own party’s campaign material yesterday, you chose to conflate the Toronto District School Board’s Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism, A K-12 Curriculum Resource with the 2010 provincial Health and Education Curriculum, Grades 1-8 that was proposed and withdrawn within weeks. On a grand scale, that’s misleading in terms of responsibility. The provincial Liberal party is responsible for a curriculum created under the direction of their government, while the local school board is responsible for a curriculum resource they created. Claiming Dalton McGuinty is responsible for the TDSB’s Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism, A K-12 Curriculum Resource is giving credit where it is just not warranted. Even more egregious is that in conflating the two documents you are conflating sex education with challenging homophobia. People who want to continue encouraging hatred towards people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, two spirit, transsexual, intersex, queer or questioning often do this. Let me be clear, challenging homophobia and gender bias is not sex education - it is about ending discrimination, and valuing actual human beings. Sex education is about teaching people about their bodies and how to keep themselves and others healthy and well. They are both important, but they are not the same thing.
A number of well respected news resources have already written about how the quotes in your campaign material either do not exist in the document it purports to be quoting, or are greatly redacted in such a way that the meaning is altered. I expect you will apologize for this smear on the work of the TDSB and hateful fear mongering against people who are gender nonconforming and people who’s sexual orientation is other than straight.
What you have said about parental rights and Ontario’s Health and Education Curriculum still needs to be addressed.
Being as you brought it up, let’s start by clearly saying that as a parent, you absolutely have the right to have your child exempted from sex education. You said:
“My little girl Miller - it’s her birthday today - is just four and she has started JK,” he said. “The notion that Dalton McGuinty thinks a priority in education is sex-education curriculum starting at Grade 1 when they should be learning their ABCs and how to tie their shoes is another example of how Dalton McGuinty has lost touch with mainstream Ontario.”
So let’s look at the sex-education Miller would have received in grade one, had the 2010 curriculum been implemented (which again, it has not). I’ve quoted here absolutely everything the curriculum has to say about sex-education in the grade one section:
Human Development and Sexual Health
C1.3 identify body parts, including genitalia (e.g. penis, testicles, vagina, vulva), using correct terminology [PS]
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “We have talked about the body parts that everyone has. What body parts do only boys have and what body parts do only girls have?”
Student: “Boys have a penis. Girls have a vagina.”
Teacher: “We talk about these body parts, like all body parts, with respect.”
C1.4 identify the five senses and describe how each functions (e.g., sight: the eyes give the brain information about the world to help us see colours, shapes, and movement; touch: receptors in the skin tell us how things feel - if they are hot, cold, wet, dry, hard, soft; hearing: the ears pick up vibrations and send messages to the brain to help us hear sounds that are loud or soft, high- or lowpitched; smell and taste: the tongue is covered with thousands of taste buds and the nose has tiny
hairs and nerves that send messages to the brain about how things taste and smell) [PS]
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “How do you use your senses as you explore outside in the natural world? If you close your eyes,”. (p.81)
HEALTHY LIVING
Human Development and Sexual Health
C2.5 demonstrate an understanding of and apply proper hygienic procedures for protecting their own health and preventing the transmission of disease to others (e.g., washing hands with soap using a tissue, sleeve sneezing, brushing and flossing teeth, not sharing hats or hairbrushes)
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “Why is it important to wash your hands before you eat and after you use the washroom?”
Student: “Washing your hands helps to stop germs from spreading. We should wash with warm water and soap for as long as it takes to say the alphabet.”. (p.83)
The existing curriculum - the one in use in Ontario, which was implemented in 1998 under Mike Harris’ Progressive Conservative government has this to say in the grade one curriculum:
Growth and Development
- describe simple life cycles of plants and
animals, including humans;
- recognize that rest, food, and exercise affect
growth;
- identify the major parts of the body by
their proper names; (p.12)
Noting that both talk about identifying parts of the body by their proper names, and that the significant new material is about hygiene, I understand that you are saying that you believe mainstream Ontario does not want hand washing taught in grade one. Sir, I respectfully submit that it is you who is out of step both with mainstream Ontario and with public health initiatives across the province.
As a parent, you have an absolute right to your own beliefs. If the proposed curriculum is in fact implemented by the time Miller is in grade one, as her parent, you have an absolute right to pull her out of school when hand washing is being taught. However, if you were to become premier, the education of every child in Ontario, and not just the education of your own child would become your responsibility. Imposing your anti-hand washing values on all grade one students across the province would be foolhardy and dangerous. I urge you to make decisions based on science, public health research, and in the public interest, not based on your own anti-hand washing biases.
Dear Tim Hudak
Yesterday, quite a number of news sources reported on a piece of campaign literature your party distributed in the Toronto area, where I live.
When asked about your own party’s campaign material yesterday, you chose to conflate the Toronto District School Board’s Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism, A K-12 Curriculum Resource with the 2010 provincial Health and Education Curriculum, Grades 1-8 that was proposed and withdrawn within weeks. On a grand scale, that’s misleading in terms of responsibility. The provincial Liberal party is responsible for a curriculum created under the direction of their government, while the local school board is responsible for a curriculum resource they created. Claiming Dalton McGuinty is responsible for the TDSB’s Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism, A K-12 Curriculum Resource is giving credit where it is just not warranted. Even more egregious is that in conflating the two documents you are conflating sex education with challenging homophobia. People who want to continue encouraging hatred towards people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, two spirit, transsexual, intersex, queer or questioning often do this. Let me be clear, challenging homophobia and gender bias is not sex education - it is about ending discrimination, and valuing actual human beings. Sex education is about teaching people about their bodies and how to keep themselves and others healthy and well. They are both important, but they are not the same thing.
A number of well respected news resources have already written about how the quotes in your campaign material either do not exist in the document it purports to be quoting, or are greatly redacted in such a way that the meaning is altered. I expect you will apologize for this smear on the work of the TDSB and hateful fear mongering against people who are gender nonconforming and people who’s sexual orientation is other than straight.
What you have said about parental rights and Ontario’s Health and Education Curriculum still needs to be addressed.
Being as you brought it up, let’s start by clearly saying that as a parent, you absolutely have the right to have your child exempted from sex education. You said:
“My little girl Miller - it’s her birthday today - is just four and she has started JK,” he said. “The notion that Dalton McGuinty thinks a priority in education is sex-education curriculum starting at Grade 1 when they should be learning their ABCs and how to tie their shoes is another example of how Dalton McGuinty has lost touch with mainstream Ontario.”
So let’s look at the sex-education Miller would have received in grade one, had the 2010 curriculum been implemented (which again, it has not). I’ve quoted here absolutely everything the curriculum has to say about sex-education in the grade one section:
Human Development and Sexual Health
C1.3 identify body parts, including genitalia (e.g. penis, testicles, vagina, vulva), using correct terminology [PS]
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “We have talked about the body parts that everyone has. What body parts do only boys have and what body parts do only girls have?”
Student: “Boys have a penis. Girls have a vagina.”
Teacher: “We talk about these body parts, like all body parts, with respect.”
C1.4 identify the five senses and describe how each functions (e.g., sight: the eyes give the brain information about the world to help us see colours, shapes, and movement; touch: receptors in the skin tell us how things feel - if they are hot, cold, wet, dry, hard, soft; hearing: the ears pick up vibrations and send messages to the brain to help us hear sounds that are loud or soft, high- or lowpitched; smell and taste: the tongue is covered with thousands of taste buds and the nose has tiny
hairs and nerves that send messages to the brain about how things taste and smell) [PS]
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “How do you use your senses as you explore outside in the natural world? If you close your eyes,”. (p.81)
HEALTHY LIVING
Human Development and Sexual Health
C2.5 demonstrate an understanding of and apply proper hygienic procedures for protecting their own health and preventing the transmission of disease to others (e.g., washing hands with soap using a tissue, sleeve sneezing, brushing and flossing teeth, not sharing hats or hairbrushes)
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “Why is it important to wash your hands before you eat and after you use the washroom?”
Student: “Washing your hands helps to stop germs from spreading. We should wash with warm water and soap for as long as it takes to say the alphabet.”. (p.83)
The existing curriculum - the one in use in Ontario, which was implemented in 1998 under Mike Harris’ Progressive Conservative government has this to say in the grade one curriculum:
Growth and Development
- describe simple life cycles of plants and
animals, including humans;
- recognize that rest, food, and exercise affect
growth;
- identify the major parts of the body by
their proper names; (p.12)
Noting that both talk about identifying parts of the body by their proper names, and that the significant new material is about hygiene, I understand that you are saying that you believe mainstream Ontario does not want hand washing taught in grade one. Sir, I respectfully submit that it is you who is out of step both with mainstream Ontario and with public health initiatives across the province.
As a parent, you have an absolute right to your own beliefs. If the proposed curriculum is in fact implemented by the time Miller is in grade one, as her parent, you have an absolute right to pull her out of school when hand washing is being taught. However, if you were to become premier, the education of every child in Ontario, and not just the education of your own child would become your responsibility. Imposing your anti-hand washing values on all grade one students across the province would be foolhardy and dangerous. I urge you to make decisions based on science, public health research, and in the public interest, not based on your own anti-hand washing biases.