BSVDWatch.org

There was nothing sensationalistic about the Camera's report. It was about Daphne White's opposition to the event, so it focused on her opinions.

It gave completeness and balance by listing the titles of other panel discussions at BHS.

It is not surprising at all that no one at the board meeting would come to the defense of the event or its content.

The Camera's tendency is to put a liberal spin on things, and the fact that there was no attempt in the article to present some defense of the panel discussion is very telling indeed. It shows that in all likelihood, no such defense was forthcoming, and/or that the intended message of the panel discussion went too far for even the Camera's editorial philosophy.

Camera's article was shameless and inaccurate. Quotes were taken completely out of context and one can hardly count the fallacies employed by Amy Bounds. Clearly Daphne and the paper have nothing better to do than irresponsibly foster controversy. Let's not forget about the CWA's outstanding history and reputation. If the school decides to no longer host panels, it will be a sadly missed opportunity for 99% of its students who benefit from the intellectual adventure.

I was at the Board meeting, and was most disappointed by the Board's attempt to shut Mrs. White up. She remained composed and finished her statement, but was unable to read any more of the transcript, the ideas and content of which was indeed shocking,but was not obscene language and I do believe the Board just wanted to shut this down quickly. This scene was very sanitized by the Camera. Daphne White was quite mature in her descriptions of the panel and their reaction to her responses. The Camera completly ignored the fact that her religious beliefs were demeaned by the panelists. Overall, though, the Camera article was much more balanced than those I have seen in the past when I was privy to what really happened or what was said in other controversial school issue situations. Thanks to BVSDWatch for making it possible for people to view board meetings and exchange views!

Its a sad state of affairs when BVSD parents and students have to resort to televised public statements to get attention for a serious matter. The Whites went first to BHS principal Bud Jenkins and then to asst superintendent Chris King to voice their complaint. But they got the usual BVSD brush off, when clearly the matter required some response and attention. This arrogance and disregard for the public has been a defining characteristic of BVSD throughout every district controversy. With better leadership and governance, BVSD could avoid such controversies. Admin needs to spend less time on Power Point presentations to the Board, and more time serving students, teachers and parents.

What is most disturbing to me about this whole board meeting is the board's attempt to hide behind their "legal council" to stop Ms. White from speaking. WHEN will BVSD begin to listen to what people have taken time to say to them!?

I noticed that this site, this representative site, belonging to BVSD, is not airing the audio, but they are censoring against a "dicussion thread," otherwise known as a discussion; in this case a community discussion. Hmmm.....

I just finished listening to the entire CD of the BHS panel. I thought it was terrific. The panelists were extremely sensitive to the responsibility inherent in talking to teens about sex and drugs, and they chose their words very carefully. They all encouraged their audience to wait until they are older and wiser and more mature and self-aware, and they talked about some of the physical reasons to wait as well. They were talking ABOUT sex and drugs but they were not ENDORSING sex and drugs for teens.
At the same time, they didn't disparage any responsible choices a teen might make. They emphasized that there ARE choices to be made (whether to do or not to do this or that), and that the teen's biggest job is to know him/herself well enough, and to understand the physical, emotional, and (sometimes) life-changing consequences of this or that path well enough, that he/she can make a thoughtful, responsible choice. Even Dr. Becker made it clear that he was telling teens to experiment responsibly only because he believes that many (most?) teens WILL experiment anyway, so they have a duty to be informed so that if the initial game plan (abstinence) fails, they can make responsible choices.
The young woman at the end (Ms. White) was treated with respect and sensitivity. She was applauded by the panel and the students. Her question was answered thoughtfully.
The panelists were cool and hip and thus very accessible to the audience. They used words and stories and examples that I'm sure the teens found very appealing. It was healthy for teens to hear adults talk about condoms and masturbation and bad LSD trips and more. The panelists didn't glamorize any of it; they didn't feed into the aura of sex and drugs. They talked about how marijuana de-motivates you, and the consequences to your grades of being stoned; they talked about the adverse effect of drugs and alcohol on sexual performance; they talked about the emotional toll of loveless sex. These are all messages I think any parent would want his/her teen to hear! In fact, I wish that my kids (now well grown with families) could have heard a panel like this when they were at BHS - they would have learned a lot more than I was ever able to tell them!
PS - I just read the Whites' response to the CWA statement. Having heard the audio myself, I can say unequivocally that the panelists DID NOT "irresponsibly advise Boulder High students to have sex and use drugs." And teenage abstinence was NOT "dismissed as an unwise choice and indicative of religious hang-ups." To the contrary, the panelists were clear, both before Ms. White's question and in responding to her, that abstinence is a valid (and often wise) choice, but that, as statistics show, some teenagers fall off the abstinence wagon and THEREFORE all teens have an obligation to be informed about other options and consequences (NOT an obligation to go out and start experimenting!). In response to Ms. White's concern that he was denigrating religiously-motivated abstinence, Dr. Becker clearly said that he supports anyone who chooses abstinence for religious (or any other) reasons, but that he worries that some abstinence-based programs refuse to acknowledge the validity of any other choice, and refuse to educate students about other options, or about the real potential consequences of other choices. He did not say that abstinence was "unwise" or indicative of any "hang-ups," religious or otherwise.
Sara-Jane Cohen

I've also listened to the whole panel - available earlier today at tapesagain.com as a free mp3 download. (The site later ran out of bandwidth, and is working to get back online and continue to provide it.)

Sara-Jane Cohen's description is right-on. I encourage parents to listen to it, and to share some or all of it with their teens if they deem it appropriate. Parents and students should be able to opt-out of controvertial programs, but I hope BVSD continues to bring this kind of program to the schools.

Neal McBurnett

I have listened to the tapes now, too, and I think the Whites were right. This whole thing about telling teens to go out and experiment, but "keep focussed" reminds me of the bumper sticker that used to be on the back of beer trucks: "Think when you Drink"
Yeah, right.

I am the parent of a BHS student who did not attend. Nonetheless, I believe that the consequences, if any, to a child in attendance at this panel can be quickly mitigated by a discussion with a parent or other trusted, responsible adult. Further, stimulation of said discussion is a great benefit. In my opinion, the venue was more problematic than the content. These sessions are too large and public for meaningful dialogue on such a sensitive issue with this age group. Also, most of the panel was not qualified to speak to children about sex and drugs, tasks best left to parents and professionals. This is not surprising. The Conference on World Affairs is a philanthropy for rich people that takes pride in providing D-list celebrities with a platform to speak about things they know nothing about. Despite the fact that extremely poor judgement by officials at BVSD and CWA created this tempest, let us all remember that it really is in a teapot. Let's talk to our children about sex and help them interpret external messages, many far more inappropriate than anything said at the recent panel.