Plan for Sex Education Supported : Simi Valley: Trustees say they will approve the revised curriculum. But parents, activists and students are still divided on the issue.

A majority of Simi Valley’s school trustees said they will approve a revised sex-education curriculum next month, ending an intense two-year debate over how--or whether--birth control should be taught.

While acknowledging that some areas of the curriculum still need to be refined, school board members said they are weary of the argument and are eager to approve the new curriculum at their next meeting on Feb. 14.

But parents, activists and students continued to berate board members at the trustees’ meeting Tuesday evening, some saying the seventh- and 10th-grade curriculum needs more detailed information on birth control, while others saying it needs less.

Some speakers argued that the lessons need to teach more about birth control and the advantages of condoms and other birth-control devices--and include a discussion of homosexuality. Others said the materials should stress the virtue of abstinence.

Calling the new lessons “immature,” Simi Valley High student Lauren McAuliffe said the district has a prudish approach to sex education that is flawed because it does not provide adequate information on birth-control methods.

“Nobody listened to it last year, nobody is going to listen to it this year,” she told the board. “I mean, wake up. This program will do no good.”

Paige Moser, local chapter president of the National Organization for Women, said the curriculum shows a lack of respect for teen-agers in its language and format.

“After over 1 1/2 years of contentious sex-education debate, what the district has presented is a mishmash of “Just Say No” lessons,” Moser said.

*

Several conservative parents also blasted the proposed curriculum. But they said it needed a stronger emphasis on abstinence--not birth control.

“This is not a good curriculum,” said parent Ginny Murray, who told board members the best way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease is abstinence.

“Sexuality today is extremely dangerous,” she said. “And we are not doing our children any good by skirting the issue.”

As the debate crept near midnight Tuesday, exasperated board members said it might be impossible to reach an acceptable compromise on such a controversial matter.

“I am very frustrated,” trustee Judy Barry said. “After almost two years, it doesn’t look like we have pleased anybody. I am almost to the point where I’d say, ‘Let’s divide our kids into two groups. . . . We’ll provide the time, date and place and let both kinds of curriculum be taught.’ ”

*

Trustee Norm Walker immediately embraced the idea. “A split curriculum might be the way to go,” he said eagerly. “I am willing to take the time to get it right.”

But the pleas and suggestions failed to sway most of the trustees, who said they are ready to approve the materials as written.

“Maybe it doesn’t go as far as some people would like,” trustee Carla Kurachi said. “(But) I think this is a fine curriculum.”

Although sex education is not required in California, most school districts teach students how to protect themselves against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, state education officials said.

Last February, the Simi Valley board approved a set of guidelines developed by school officials, parents and students. Under them, seventh-graders would learn about some methods of pregnancy prevention such as birth control pills and condoms, and 10th-graders would learn about all methods of birth control.