AN ACT relating to human growth and development instruction.
SB 320 would revise Kentucky law governing school instruction on human sexuality, sexually transmitted diseases, and human growth and development. The bill keeps the existing emphasis on abstinence and monogamous relationships, but adds stronger parental-notice and consent requirements, limits instruction for students in grade five and below, and bars any instruction or presentation aimed at students studying or exploring gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation. For students in grade six and above, it requires schools to provide instruction on human growth and development that includes a high-definition ultrasound video and a computer-generated animation showing fertilization and fetal development through birth.
The bill also requires schools offering these programs to provide an alternative course or activity for students whose parents do not consent, and to allow parents to inspect curriculum materials, lesson plans, assessments, surveys, assignments, and instructional activities. Schools must give parents at least two weeks’ notice before participation begins and explain how to review materials and provide written consent. The bill preserves limited exceptions for age-appropriate child sexual abuse prevention instruction, classroom discussion of sexuality when relevant to approved curriculum, and responses to student questions tied to approved instruction.
SB 320 would amend KRS 158.1415 and expand state-level requirements for public school health and sexuality-related instruction. It would impose new restrictions on what younger students may be taught, require written parental consent for grade six and above, and mandate specific fetal-development instructional content in human growth and development classes. The bill would also increase parental access to instructional materials and require schools to offer nonpenalized alternatives for students whose parents withhold consent, affecting school districts, teachers, curriculum providers, and parents statewide.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or recorded support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text, the measure is framed around parental rights, age-appropriate instruction, and public health, suggesting a generally supportive posture toward more parental control and more prescriptive curriculum standards. The absence of votes or hearing comments means the overall legislative sentiment cannot be measured from the available record.
The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s restrictions on instruction involving gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation, and its requirement for written parental consent before students in grade six and above may participate in human sexuality or sexually transmitted disease instruction. Another likely area of dispute is the mandated ultrasound video and fetal-development animation, which may be viewed by supporters as medically informative and by critics as ideologically driven. The bill also raises potential concerns for educators and districts about implementation, curriculum review, and balancing parental rights with student access to health education.