Issue
Standards for Explicit Sexual Content in Schools
KEY POINTS
- School Boards are legally permitted to create policy setting standards for preventing age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and library.
- The standard ought not be: “As long as this book doesn’t land us in jail for giving it to a minor, the sexually explicit content is welcome in our curriculum or the school library.”
- Written policy protects students, parents, employees, and the school
and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries. - Schools should prioritize material that provides rich educational value over material that may provide similar value but also has age-inappropriate sexually explicit content.
- Age-Appropriate policies are not directed at viewpoint and are not banning the book from student possession. They are exercising the schools prerogative to determine what to include in its own library and curriculum.
Standards for Sexually Explicit Content in Schools
Schools must engage in line-drawing for age appropriateness of sexually explicit content in their library and curriculum. Criminal laws are one required line prohibiting schools from giving materials to minors in curriculum or library that a court deems pornographic or obscene. But what about sexually explicit content that does not rise to the extremely high bar of criminal law?
School boards are legally permitted to articulate standards that go beyond “would we land in jail for giving this book to a minor?” to prevent other age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and school library. Unfortunately, many schools have no policy standards for sexually explicit material beyond criminal law.
Schools with written age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit materials that differ for elementary, middle, and high schools protect students and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries.
But such written policies also protect the school’s staff and district from costly litigation. Even without written policy, a school librarian, principal, or school board is permitted to remove a particular title they deem age-inappropriate sexually explicit material. But with written policy standards, the school is less susceptible to baseless allegations that the title was removed for an impermissible viewpoint discriminatory reason.
School employees still have wide discretion to select and purchase books that comport with the age-appropriate standards in written policy set by the school board, and from that universe of materials, parents then have ultimate authority to make additional age-appropriate determinations for their own child and should have authority to restrict certain titles for their own child.
Individuals who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors sometimes argue that such policies are “book bans.” Attempts at labeling common-sense school standards as “book bans” have been rejected by courts, most recently in August of 2022 by a federal court in Missouri.
A parent, for example, who wants to buy sexually explicit books for their own child to read are not prevented from doing so by such school policies. School policies setting forth its own age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit content in its own curriculum and school library do not even prohibit a student from bringing their own book to school or from reading it in an appropriate time, such as study hall. But school districts do not have to put such explicit books in their own curriculum or in the school library, and such a decision by the school is not a ban on books.
Such policies treat inappropriate sexually explicit content the same regardless of whether the sexually explicit depictions or descriptions happen to be between straight, gay, or even a lone person. As such the argument made by those who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors, that these policies are directed at LGBT people, is false.
Too many schools lack baseline standards regarding sexually explicit content in school libraries. Schools ought to spend the finite time in the day on academic excellence, and sexually explicit content detracts from that. Explicit sexual depictions and descriptions may sell, but refusal to purchase it is no ban. Districts can decide not to buy and stock sexually explicit content. If you are a school board member who desires to implement such a policy, we are glad to assist you.

Related Articles
Leader of PFI’s Sister Organization in Virginia Highlighted
Pennsylvania Family Institute is part of a network of about 35 independent state-based family policy councils around the country -- all working to influence policy, strengthen families and advocate for truth. Victoria Cobb, Executive Director of PFI's sister...
Looking to compare the candidates?
Last night was supposed to be a debate between the two U.S. Senate candidates, Democrat Joe Sestak and Republican Pat Toomey, but Sestak had a scheduling conflict. How are you supposed to compare their views if you don’t hear them side-by-side? Well, the Pennsylvania...
“Peace, Man!” A Memory from the PFI Banquet with Sarah Palin
Our recent banquet with Sarah Palin in Hershey left a great impression on many of the 1,100 in attendance. We've heard many positive comments and praise for the event. But I like this story the best, because it helps give a more complete picture of the spirit of our...
Order Your 2010 Voters’ Guides!
This year's Voters' Guide will contain non-partisan information about candidates for Pennsylvania Governor and United States Senate - two of the most-watched races in the nation. Plus, there will be information on US House and races right down to State House and...
Good News for Protecting Life and the Disabled
The Independence Law Center just received good news in a case involving David Hockenberry, a mentally retarded man whose guardians sought court approval to refuse life-preserving medical treatment. Mr. Hockenberry is not permanently unconscious or suffering from any...
When is a leg not a leg? When it’s not.
We bring you a must-read article from Professor Stephen J. Heany on the fallacy of "same-sex marriage." http://bit.ly/cpEdWU Abraham Lincoln once asked how many legs a dog has if we call a tail a leg. The answer, he said, is four: calling a tail a leg does not make it...
Central Institution of Society Takes a Direct Hit
From Dr. Albert Mohler on the overturning of Proposition 8: http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/08/05/the-gavel-falls-on-marriage-the-proposition-8-decision/ "Thousands of cases make their way through the Federal courts each year. Some are important, but only a few have...
Marriage and Democracy – Victims of Judge’s Decision in California Case
August 5, 2010 For Immediate Release Marriage and Democracy Both Victims of Federal Judge’s Decision in California Case Harrisburg, Pa. In a stunning act of judicial activism at its worst, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker struck down as unconstitutional California’s...
