I need a fast answer! HIV movie 2nd grade?

[redebeth]

Help! My son got a permission slip sent home yesterday to watch a movie today about HIV/aids. I didn't see it until late last night.

Now, I am baffled at why they would teach 2nd graders about a disease that, as real as it is, is something they should not have to worry about for at least 7 or 8 more years. And really, would they show a movie about smoking and lung cancer?

I don't really want to be 'that mom', but am I off base for thinking this is too early?

[Katzchen]

I would probably ask to screen the film myself before allowing my child to see it at that age.

But since it is being shown tomorrow I would say "No" and request that the teacher send out notices well in advance of this type of material in the classroom to allow for more parent involvement.

(After all, if you haven't seen the film it makes it really difficult to discuss it with you child and answer any question he may have)

[calpurnia]

How old is 2nd grade?

[art_teachermommy]

The teacher should have allowed more time for parents to make a decision on the film first off. Sending home a note the day before a movie is to be shown is a little irresponsible. We all know that only about half of what we send out actually makes it home to the parents anyway. It seems too that more info should have been sent out as to why it fits in with what they are learning.

I would say no. Based on it's too young for them to view that and that adequate information was not provided to the parent.

Do you know what has been taught leading up to this movie for it to fit in with curriculum?

[MountainLaurel]

Why shouldn't a kid have to worry about? It's not like you have to be shooting up smack in the Chuck-E-Cheese to get it: Perhaps he has a classmate who has been HIV positive since birth and the school is trying to educate classmates.

[lindsaye3]

What Katzchen said. I would want to see the movie first (or at least have an idea of what it is about, i.e., kids with HIV or the crisis in Africa or what) so I would know what it was about and be able to discuss the movie in a reasonable manner.

Calpurina - 2nd grade is about 7-8 years old.

[choli]

Originally Posted by redebeth

Help! My son got a permission slip sent home yesterday to watch a movie today about HIV/aids. I didn't see it until late last night.

Now, I am baffled at why they would teach 2nd graders about a disease that, as real as it is, is something they should not have to worry about for at least 7 or 8 more years. And really, would they show a movie about smoking and lung cancer?

I don't really want to be 'that mom', but am I off base for thinking this is too early?

Why do you think they shouldn't "have to worry about" HIV/Aids for 7 or 8 years? There may well be HIV positive children in your son's class. I think it is good for children to have an understanding of HIV/AIDS so that they can tell the myths from the truth.

[redebeth]

There doesn't seem to be a curriculum this film is fitting into. It's out of the blue.

I think kids have an innocence that should be preserved as long as possible, they simply don't need to know about everything bad in the world until necessary.

I believe the point of the move is to help undo the stigma of HIV, that's a good thing. But he's not raised in a home where he would be taught HIV is this or that. My dad is an old school Md who was one of the first immunologists working on the disease back in the 80's. I kind of grew up with it, which is ironic. I didn't even make that connection till right now.

I really can't trust what they present will be something I would agree to.

2nd grade? This is crazy.

[Tigerchild]

First, I wouldn't assume anything is "crazy" unless you've seen it. Which it's within your rights to do as a parent. Can you possibly carve out some time to go watch it at the school ASAP?

I'd have no problem with this, mainly because we've talked about basic sexuality, body parts, different kinds of relationships, ect with our kids since they were about 3 or 4. So if there was anything even remotely "sex ed" about the film, my kids would be likely to correct any misinformation, knowing them.

I don't think innocence is destroyed by education, but whatever floats your boat.

And I agree with others. I would not be surprised if the reasons why they are showing an educational film about HIV outside of any sexuality curriculum (I think 2nd grade for the basic level of sexuality curriculum is too late, the 'window' where children feel comfortable and not self-conscious talking about stuff like that probably has already closed for awhile for most of them) would be that it's likely there is one or more children at the school who might have the disease.

This HIV film is likely not the HIV film of the 80s/90s. I'm kind of suprised that you seem to be thinking of this apparently mostly as a STD, given your background. I would say it's pretty important that you see this film even if you don't allow your child to, so you can give them feedback on any misinformation and perhaps your dad could suggest better ones if it's a crappy film.

[meowee]

I would not give permission until I screened the film.

[a(TM)?Star]

I'm guessing that there is some reason they are showing it.....a lesson based on it, a student perhaps may be HIV positive?

[ThreeBeans]

There is a good chance there are people right in your son's classroom who are HIV positive.

What's the movie? Are we talking Philadelphia? Which, although being an awesome movie is not appropriate for children

I am sure there are appropriate films out there for children his age. I would certainly allow and encourage my child to see that movie.

[happyhippiemama]

I'd be fine with it.

[redebeth]

I guess that I am of the school of thought that children are given enough to worry about in daily life without adding to it willy nily.

I can think of about 50 things off the top of my head that kids in his class are probably dealing with, that he doesn't need to know about right now.

I think there was an article a year or so in Mothering that really resonated with me about teaching kids about our environmental problems before they have had time to learn to love it for what it is. I can't begin to paraphrase that whole article but that was sort of the gist of it. This is the same thing for me.

I never said that HIV is primarily an STD, that is reading into my words.

So I signed the slip so he can see the movie mainly because I know if he is pulled out of class with a handful of other kids they will be dying to hear from the ones who saw it what the movie was about. Then he will surely get some messed up info. So best he sees it first hand rather than hear it second hand with who know what else mixed in.

I still think this is crazy.

[Kirsten]

Did the permission slip list the name of the movie? Could you look online for info on it? Did you call the school for more information?

We had info on smoking and lung cancer when I was in 1st or 2nd grade. They talked to us, might have been a film clip (can't remember), then we saw a pig lung that had been exposed to cigarette smoke vs. one that hadn't. Made a huge impression, and I have never so much as tried a cigarette. I would be absolutely fine with my kids seeing a presentation on lung cancer, effects of smoking, etc.

HIV/AIDS - if it were age appropriate I'd be fine with it. Was the slip given out yesterday, or did your child leave it in her mailbox or backpack for a few days before remembering to give it to you? One night isn't enough time to research for those who want to so if that is the case, I'd be mad too.

Overall, I think we wait too long to discuss certain topics with kids. If you wait "til they need it", you're already too late for some as they are doing it already; others have made their own decisions about what they think about it before getting your two cents.

Someone here on MDC recommended the film "It's Elementary". Amazing, amazing film. You could apply the responses of the different age groups in that film to HIV education too.

In the OP's situation, if I trusted and had a good relationship with the teacher and administration of dc's school, I'd probably ok the film.

[Calidris]

Well, it would depend on the movie of course, but I assume it would be something made for 2nd graders and would not go into a lot of detail about unprotected sex, homosexuals or IV drug abuse.
At 8 there is no reason why they should not start educating children about HIV, there are probably people in your child's life who are HIV positive, it is quite possible that the movie was inspired by children saying ignorant or hateful things about AIDS.

And really, would they show a movie about smoking and lung cancer?

And wrt this don't they start the anti-smoking propaganda at least this young?

[ThreeBeans]

Yes, they do start educating second graders...kindergarteners actually...about smoking, considering it's a massive public health concern.

I'm glad you made the decision0 you did, OP.

[dubfam]

I would say no, because you haven't seen the film. I wouldn't want my dc getting bad information, or too much information.

I wonder why they are showing the movie?
I know that HIV is more than just an STD, but it is still an STD. I also don;t want my child to know about IV drug use at that age. I can't imagine a movie about HIV that doesn't at least touch on those things (since those are 2 of the main ways that people get the disease). I don;t know WHY an 8 yo needs to know about IV drug use or STD's.

FTR I can't imagine allowing my child to do any of the sex ed classes at that age either.
I really feel like this stuff is best taught at home. I am glad that they teach it in the schools because there are a lot of parents that don't talk to their kids about it. But I really don't want my kids learning this stuff from public school.

I hope that it goes okay...it sounds like a tough decision...esp since he would ask his classmates about it if you said no...


.

[a(TM)?Star]

The more I think about it, it's not the AIDS issue I have a problem with at all, it's how they would describe getting it. I'm not sure if my 2nd grader needs to know about sexual transmission. ( I know that it's not the only way to get it.) I dunno how they would explain that.

[momz3]

My vote is no I wouldn't without checking it out myself first.