District Round-up 10.04.26
Dear Neighbor, Thank you for reading my District Round-up. As your candidate for Pennsylvania’s 13th Congressional District, it is my honor and pleasure to deliver to you where I’ve been and what issues I’ve tackled in the past week. Criss-crossing the counties of Adams, Franklin, Fulton, Bedford, Cambria, Blair, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Juniata, Perry, Cumberland, and Somerset gives me great opportunities to meet with voters, hear what is on your hearts and minds, and the chance to voice my fight for Everyday Americans. If you would like to contribute to my campaign, please donate here: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/beth-farnham-for-congress-1
PA Licensed Daycares Must Accept Unvaccinated Children
Did you know that Pennsylvania licensed daycares must accept the signed statement of parents who believe antivaccine claptrap, and still admit the children?
That’s right, Pennsylvania Parents, the children of antivaxxers may very well walk or crawl the halls of the licensed daycare who demanded your child’s immunization record as part of the admission process.
You don’t know which children in the building don’t have their shots.
But antivaxxer parents knew to ask for the exemption form.
You only know that your dear child has as many boosters as their young age will permit under the vaccine schedule recommended by the American Association of Pediatrics (AAP).
And if your child is under a year old, they most likely haven’t had their first measles shot.
Oh sure, in the midst of an outbreak a school or daycare might not admit the unvaccinated children, but timing is everything and some diseases don’t show symptoms until the child has already spread it.
Antivaxxers don’t care if their kids suffer measles, mumps, polio, chicken pox, meningococcus, rubella, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), Hepatitus B, Hepatitus A, Rotavirus, Diphtheria, Whooping cough, the Flu, Human Papillomavirus, and COVID 19.
Antivaxxers don’t care if your kids suffer them either.
In fact, most haven’t told you their kids don’t have their shots. And if they can sell you some snake oil to cure what ails ya, they can profit from widespread disease and ignorance.
But it doesn’t have to be this way.
You can ask other parents what their vaccine philosophy is, then make decisions about who your children play with.
You can also vote for legislators at the state and federal level to stand up for science and stop mandating licensed daycares to admit unvaccinated children.
(Children whose parents follow the AAP recommended schedule of shots are likely to be fully immunized against the major diseases and can readily attend kindergarten as they are likely to be immunized enough to be in the general population. Obviously, none of this applies to the children who suffer medical conditions and literally can’t be vaccinated. We vaccinate our children to protect not only ours but the medically fragile ones too.)
Please vote for me, Beth Farnham, on November 3rd, so I can vote to stop daycares from accepting children who are not fully vaccinated, except for medically-fragile children, according to the AAP schedule.
Together, we #ChooseDemocracy and the good health of our children!
Goose Democracy
Great time at Red, White, and GOOSE parade in Lewistown Tuesday night!
Thank you, Jack, for carrying the banner with me!
#GooseDemocracy!
Like the Cornell 7, Purity Culture Compares Females to Trash
Why does my fight for Reproductive Freedom include national standards for sexuality education?
Because the “Cornell 7” happens when schools teach that girls and women are as disposable as trash.
In many unvetted “Sex Ed” classes, such as those taught by Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs), there is often the “tape” lesson.
The premise is simple – each girl receives a piece of scotch tape and is encouraged to stick it onto the shirts or sweaters of as many boys as possible. After much giggling, everyone returns to their seats.
Then the girls are asked what’s different about the piece of tape.
The answers vary from, “It doesn’t work anymore” to “It doesn’t stick anymore” to “It’s worthless.”
The lesson?
If a young woman is with too many young men, she will lose her worth.
In fact the awful, religiously-based, sex ed that I worked with others to remove from two public school districts in 2019 was titled, “Project Worth.”
This is the kind of miseducation that contributes to the Cornell 7 and the like.
At the federal level we can institute national standards of sexuality education that are comprehensive, LGBTQ+-inclusive, and rooted in evidence -based science.
Please vote for me Beth Farnham so I can work with other caring legislators to provide quality instruction about consent, anatomy, contraception, sexually-transmitted infections, and more in ways that especially don’t demean girls and women.
Together, we #ChooseDemocracy and real education!
(I’m also adding my write-up of the pitiful excuse of a sex ed “lesson” I was invited to observe in 2019.)
https://siecus.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/NSES-2020-2.pdf
Assessment of the Project W.O.R.T.H. Lesson
First, I’d like to note that the students at New Oxford Middle School, whom I observed in Mr. DeFelippo’s 8th grade, 4th period health class on Friday, March 1, 2019 ( a shortened period, due to a weather delay), were a delight to watch as they engaged, participated, and volunteered throughout the lesson. I have no issue with the students of CVSD. Also I’d like to note that this assessment is not to disparage the character of Mrs. Janczyk, but to highlight the egregiousness of the use of Tender Care’s materials and agents during instructional time.
Not having been given a lesson plan to follow along the lesson with, I was promptly seated at the back of the classroom and began to take notes with pen and paper. Mr. DeFelippo opened the lesson by going around and checking homework. He also commended students for their respect toward Mrs. Janczyk and then he stepped aside. This raised the first and basic question that was never satisfactorily answered throughout the lesson – why is the certified secondary education instructor relegated to simply checking homework, passing out papers, ending the lesson with a reminder about the next homework and deferring to an outsourced agent whose agency’s mission and values are focused less on science and much more on their Statement of Faith? Presumably Mr. DeFelippo and the other health teachers were hired due to their credentials including, but not limited to: college degrees of bachelor’s or higher in specific content areas including methods of teaching courses in his area of concentration, scores from teacher assessments like the Praxis series, experience in teaching, copies of previous observations, and any other life experiences that positively contribute to their teaching, as well as having passed rounds of interviews with CVSD personnel. Furthermore, it is assumed that Mr. DeFelippo takes continuing education to ensure his continued credentials. This raised other questions that were also never satisfactorily answered – what special expertise does Mrs. Janczyk possess beyond that of any certified secondary education health teacher?
With no identifiable written objective, Mrs. Janczyk opened her part of the lesson with the statement “We’re going to talk today about important topics. We’re going to talk about consent.” The importance of consent was announced repeatedly throughout the lesson, despite the fact Day 3 of Eighth Grade especially, was not a lesson about consent, nor did the activities and stated importance of the lesson match the materials about Project W.O.R.T.H. that I had been previously given to review. The constant reminders of how important a topic this is combined with the specific activities and transparencies provided, inconsistent with the previous Project W.O.R.T.H. materials I had reviewed raised the next question – was this lesson newly created since I, along with other parents raised the issue about a substantial lack of teaching consent?
Mrs. Janczyk then directed students to anonymously write down what they thought of the topic, if they thought consent was important and why, and directed students to put them in the container, in order to establish a baseline of student understanding before beginning the lesson, but this raised yet another question – would Mrs. Janczyk expand upon and ensure individual mastery of concepts beyond this basic level of understanding?
Mrs. Janczyk then verbally defined consent, but despite the importance of this topic, she did not direct students to write down the definition she gave, she did not have it written on the board for them to copy, and she did not direct them to one in the packet, if it existed. After asking general questions about sexual consent and fielding student’s verbal answers, she posted the No/Yes transparency on the board and verbally went over it, not directing students to copy it, not directing students to any possible corresponding worksheet in the packet if it existed, and not validating any other examples that students may have provided by also writing them on the transparency.
In asking about the #Metoo movement, Mrs. Janczyk verbally received a base level of student understanding and offered one local example of sexual assault. By focusing on college students in a dorm situation, Mrs. Janczyk missed multiple opportunities to cite several examples which are more appropriate considering the ages of the students. According to an AP analysis of federal crime data, requoted by the NEA in their article http://neatoday.org/2017/12/04/sexual-assault-in-schools/ “While occasions of adult-on-child sexual assaults on school property claim headlines—and rightfully so—the problem of student-on-student sexual attacks is much more common. For every adult-on-child sexual assault, there were seven such assaults by students”.
Mrs. Janczyk also failed to mention local examples concerning adults in public secondary schools assaulting students.
https://fox43.com/2017/05/16/littlestown-high-school-band-director-charged-with-sexual-assault/
Reading student answers from the papers and verbally validating their responses, Mrs. Janczyk used the word “coerced” and defined it verbally, but did not define it in writing and did not define other vocabulary related to non-consent such as bribery and intimidation. While she mentioned sexual assault, she did not provide applicable law about statutory rape, statutory exclusion, or “Romeo and Juliet” laws of Pennsylvania. When teaching about such an important topic, especially involving behaviors that could potentially carry legal jeopardy, it is important to provide relevant specifics.
After requesting two student volunteers to walk a straight line, Mrs. Janczyk then provided Fatal Vision alcohol impairment goggles for them to wear, explaining that each pair of goggles simulated “the vision of being drunk”. A quick glance at the website for the makers of the drunk goggles reveals that they are intended for the wearer, in order to simulate the experience of navigating while drunk. Therefore, only two students used the products as intended. While it is important for students to identify when an impaired person is incapable of giving informed consent, this demonstration in navigation was a weak correlation. Demonstrating physical impairment in terms of balance and equilibrium does not correlate to simulating impaired judgement. Additionally, Mrs. Janczyk noted the simulated alcohol blood content levels at .07 and higher. Pennsylvania law allows people under the age of 21 to be charged with a D.U.I. when BAC levels are as low as .02 which would have been timely to acknowledge. Not acknowledging these things was yet another indication of Mrs. Janczyk not considering the age of the students whom she was trying to teach. Time would have been better spent if she, the adult with presumably more experience regarding sex and alcohol, had provided scenarios based in a reality that she or other adults had experienced, for students to act out and for other students to determine if they were witnessing examples of consent and if not, what types of persuasion like coercion, intimidation, bullying, extortion, etc.
Throughout the lesson Mrs. Janczyk used awkward phrasing and weak transitions such as “Very interesting when you add the element of alcohol”, “There’s a lot to say when someone is drinking. How do you put consent together in a party scene?” ,“How do you know about dating violence?”, and “When you match the pornography with alcohol, you don’t have self-control” indicating an unfamiliarity with the subject. In my opinion, Mrs. Janczyk also conveyed a lack of professionalism by referring to one student as “Sweetheart” and stating to another “You’re smart. What do you think?”
Outside of mentioning that she had known people who were gang-raped, Mrs. Janczyk did not convey expertise beyond that of the established secondary education teacher. Additionally, Mrs. Janczyk failed to make a strong correlation, if any, that consent honors the simple “no” of abstinence. Mrs. Janczyk also stated “People don’t want to go through a court scene or have people found guilty.” This statement undermines the point of the previous conversation about the #Metoo movement and Mrs. Janczyk missed an exceptional opportunity to highlight the bravery of a local student who recently approached her high school counselor about an illicit sexual relationship that a man from Conewago Township had with her beginning when she was twelve years old.
Instead, Mrs. Janczyk turned the lesson back to the Tender Care packet for a few minutes to read over some signs of unhealthy relationships. Time would have been better spent by Mrs. Janczyk showing a video about consent, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGoWLWS4-kU or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laMtr-rUEmY
While the students engaged in a group activity of answering questions about identifying boundaries, etc. (1) When should you have this conversation? 2) What should you ask?3) What, if anything, do you want to be clear about?), it was questionable for a couple of reasons. First, consent is a very abstract topic. By not establishing concrete scenarios, students were asked to imagine sexual scenarios and then the types of questions they might ask. Second, considering the relatively little sexual experience these students have presumably had, students would likely have little of their own concrete information to draw upon. While the students did participate in the activity, answers vacillated between generalized and speculative.
In directing the class to the written homework assignment she reminded students and their parents to write down what they would do in certain scenarios and requested a parent signature. Mrs. Janczyk said about the homework “Work with Mom and Dad – I need their input”. Why did Mrs. Janczyk state that she would need parental input? What happens if a student or parent shares views that are contrary to the express, explicit, and published views of Tender Care?
Student work was either collected in a container or it was displayed on the board, not to be taken home or even copied, but presumably, thrown away, calling in to question how much she truly valued student input.
A better homework assignment would have been for students to log two situations in which they were asked to give permission to someone else for something, and at least three situations in which they asked someone else for permission to do something, then to record how each situation went. This would have allowed students to explore consent situations in their own lives, to consciously practice it, or remind themselves of times that they already use it, and think critically about how they are persuaded, as well as how they persuade others.
In summary, the lack of follow-through, the missed opportunities to cite actual laws or examples more relevant to the age of her student audience, the failure to clearly define terms, especially in any written form, the inability to establish having moved students to a level beyond that of their original understanding, and the inability to establish individual student mastery of concepts, all converge to one conclusion – that Mrs. Janczyk, effectively, didn’t teach. Sure, she said some of the right things and the students were clearly engaged, but with four adults in the room, how much control of the class did she truly manage? Having observed this lesson, I am more affirmed of my position – that the Tender Care program, materials, representatives, and messages must be removed from instructional time in our public schools and replaced with the qualified instructors already in the classrooms presenting a truly comprehensive evidence-based sex ed program.
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qWai_FQdnA6RU5j2jjivrG2mGbQY2mNJ3eGPCZ4UzoU/edit?usp=sharing
Gettysburg History
Many thanks to Andrew Dalton of the Gettysburg History for presenting the Jack Hopkins house and rich history of its tenants to members and friends of the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) on Thursday.
The Hopkins house has a special place in history because it’s the story of a Black community that begins with freedom. Right now the Hopkins house is under renovation, but the vision is clear – an historic house, preserved properly for generations of visitors to learn about.
Black history is American history and I stand for its preservation (and restoration after the Trump administration).
Please vote for me, Beth Farnham, so that the truth of our nation may never be buried.
Together, we #ChooseDemocracy and History!
Another Amazing Day in our 13th Congressional District
Many thanks to the Borough of Huntingdon for holding Octoberfest and to the Newport Revitalization & Preservation Society for holding Canal Day on Saturday.
It was a beautiful, sunny day to speak to voters from many parts of our gorgeous 13th Congressional district.
While I staffed the tent in Huntingdon, Campaign Manager Jack staffed the one at Newport. Many thanks to Jack and our tremendous team of volunteers today – Deb, Janis, Kelley, Angie, and Chris – who engaged voters, set up and tore down tents, took pictures and boosted morale in general just by being there.
Together, we #ChooseDemocracy !
Continued Pain at the Pump
How many more weeks are Americans going to have to suffer these sustained high prices? It’s not just one week of high prices, it’s MONTHS!
And now people are buying their home heating oil at high prices. In the meantime, our stockpiles of weapons are dwindling, rendering our nation more vulnerable to our enemies!
But our own US Representative, multimillionaire John Joyce, won’t vote to discontinue our hostilities in Iran.
He doesn’t care what it costs Everyday Americans!
Vote for me, Beth Farnham, instead of that elitist who only serves Trump’s ego. I’ll vote us out of Iran and vote for policies that benefit Everyday Americans like hardworking families and retirees on fixed incomes, instead of kowtowing to the ultra-wealthy.
Together, we #ChooseDemocracy !
Charity of the Week!
Even though charitable donations will not meet the overwhelming need of food assistance and healthcare for lower income Americans, these charities are a stopgap until I am elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and can legislate helpful federal programs as well as prevent a rapacious president from illegally impounding the congressionally-approved funds for those programs.
Please check out the United Way of Mifflin-Juniata page and donate to them, if you can.
website – https://www.mjunitedway.org/
donation link – https://fundraise.givesmart.com/form/U8RoaQ?vid=1stlft
Comparing and Contrasting Votes on Legislation
Check out how Joyce recently voted, how I would have voted in comparison, and why!
FYI – if you’re having trouble seeing this comparison in your email, please click the option for “Read on Blog” and it will load properly for you.
If you’re like me, you love this country as much as I do and work to make a positive difference. In the midst of this Constitutional Crisis, please consider reaching out to your county Democratic committee or Democratic candidates so that we can strengthen our Democracy instead of letting it slide into fascism. We don’t just #ChooseDemocracy, we choose Pennsylvania, we choose The United States of America, we choose Humanity and I am deeply glad to work along side you. Sincerely, Beth
