|
May 22, 2006
“Unprecedented!”
screamed Bruce Trigg of the New Mexico Department of Public Health.
“Shocking!” lamented William Smith of the Sexuality Information and
Education Council of the United States. “Astounded!” wailed Jonathan
Zenilman of the American Sexually Transmitted Disease Association.
“Pure Politics!” reported Rob Stein of the Washington Post.
Earlier this
month, the CDC was roused from a one-year slumber. The minute they
opened both eyes, accusations started flying. Reporters, following
Stein’s lead, couldn’t type fast enough to get their own ten column
inches in print.
News stories
reported last minute changes to a panel at the 2006 National STD
Prevention Conference in Jacksonville, Florida.
Originally, William Smith was slated to appear and address the
question, “Are Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs a Threat to
Public Health?”
Thankfully,
people who care about the integrity of public health policy shook the
CDC by its shoulders and woke it up. A threat to public health?
Sexual abstinence until marriage? Imagine! Someone is threatening
the health of our children by teaching them the medically accurate
facts supporting sexual abstinence as an intelligent and desired
standard of behavior?
The CDC woke up
and took note. Recognizing the pure political propaganda in the title
of the panel, they took steps to bring the focus of the panel back to
science and medical health. You would have thought the CDC had shot
the family dog.
Pure politics,
Mr. Stein? You are right. But your reporting missed the very essence
of what is astounding. In truth, politics form the very heart
and soul of business as usual for Mr. Trigg, Mr. Smith and Mr.
Zenilman.
Consider William
Smith, one of the original members removed from the panel. He works
for SIECUS, a key player along with Planned Parenthood, the National
Abortion and Reproduction Rights Action League, the National
Organization for Women, the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network
and the American Civil Liberties Union…all of these organizations
united in attacking sexual abstinence as a positive health strategy.
SIECUS, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, GLSEN and ACLU. What part of
this alliance is not considered political?
And Mr. Smith’s
personal expertise? According to an Internet bio, at one time he was
working to complete a doctorate in political philosophy. And that’s
not political?
Consider Henry
Waxman (D-CA), who is also critical of abstinence programs and who
weighed in against the CDC action. Would you be surprised to know
that Waxman receives a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood,
NARAL, and NOW? No? Good. He does.
“On the votes
that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important from
1995 to 2001,” says Vote-Smart.org, “Representative Waxman voted their
preferred position 100 percent of the time.” And that’s not
political?
Thankfully, the
organizer of the original panel, Bruce Trigg of the New Mexico
Department of Public Health told Stein, “I have nothing to fear from a
balanced program.” Good deal, Bruce. That’s exactly what the CDC
took steps to ensure.
First, the name
change: “Public Health Strategies of Abstinence Programs for Youth.”
Gone was the fear-based language promising a threat to public
health. Next, the CDC took steps to remove the student of
political philosophy from the panel.
Who took his
place? None other than a board-certified ob-gyn. More than that, Dr.
Patricia Sulak “is the director of the Scott & White Sex Education
Program. Her responsibilities include overseeing curriculum content
and conducting sex education seminars for parents, teachers,
healthcare professionals and various civic and community
organizations. And…
“On May 6, 1999,
she was presented with the "Heroes for Children" award by the Texas
State Board of Education. Dr. Sulak is a Professor at the Texas A&M
University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, Texas
and the Director of the Division of Ambulatory Care in the Department
of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Scott & White Memorial Hospital and
Clinic. And…
“Dr. Sulak is
board certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, a
Fellow of the American College
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and a Board Examiner for the
American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology.”
Reporters were
half right. With the CDC asleep at the wheel, this was a panel
originally convened for the sake of “pure politics.”
Thankfully, the
CDC was roused from its sleep. It opened both eyes. And for the good
of our children, it took steps to restore integrity to the panel with
a “balanced program” that included the contributions of leading
medical experts in the field of adolescent health.
For that, they
deserve our thanks. Thanks!
Copyright © 2006 Jane Jimenez
May 2, 2005
Who is SIECUS?
May 9, 2005
SIECUS Redefines Humanity
June 6, 2005
Planned Parenthood's War Against Choice
See Archives
for past editorials.
_____________________ |
