Skip to content
Bills from the 2011–12 session

Senate Bill 237

Providing instruction in human growth and development

Topics: Federal aid, Nonmarital child, School: Board, School: Health program, State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Became law

The governor signed it on Apr 6, 2012. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Oct 14, 2011

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed 25 to 7

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed 60 to 34

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2011 Wisconsin Act 216

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 10, 2012: “Published 4-19-2012”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it does

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Under current law, a school board may offer an instructional program in human growth and development (instructional program). If the school board offers an instructional program, the instructional program must provide medically accurate information and, when age appropriate, address all of the following: 1) communication between the pupil and the pupil's parents or guardians about sexuality; 2) reproductive and sexual anatomy and physiology; 3) puberty, pregnancy, parenting, body image, and gender stereotypes; 4) skills to make responsible decisions about sexuality and sexual behavior throughout the pupil's life span, including how to recognize, rebuff, and report unwanted or inappropriate verbal, physical, or sexual behaviors; 5) the benefits of and reasons for abstaining from sexual activity; 6) the health benefits, side effects, and proper use of contraceptives and barrier methods approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prevent pregnancy and barrier methods approved by the FDA to prevent sexually transmitted infections; 7) methods for developing healthy life skills, including setting goals, responsible decision making, communication, and stress management; 8) how alcohol or drug use affects responsible decision making;

and 9) the impact of media and peer messages on thoughts, feelings, and behaviors related to sexuality. If a school board provides instruction in any of the subject areas enumerated in items 1 to 9, it must do all of the following: a) ensure that instruction in marriage and family responsibility is provided, but not necessarily in the same course or during the same school year; b) instruct pupils about the criminal penalties for engaging in sexual activities involving a child; and c) instruct pupils about sex offender registration requirements.

Read the full summary

This bill recommends, rather than requires, instructional topics for a school board that elects to provide an instructional program and restructures the recommended curriculum. The bill eliminates from the current law curriculum items 3 and 6, above, but retains discussion of pregnancy, parenting, and gender stereotypes in other portions of the recommended curriculum. The bill modifies item 4 by adding discussion of bullying, and modifies item 5 to require the instruction under that item to identify the skills necessary to remain abstinent. The bill also adds the following subjects to the recommended topics, instruction of which is to be medically accurate and provided when age appropriate: adoption resources, prenatal care, and postnatal supports, and the nature and treatment of sexually transmitted infections, personal responsibility, and the positive connection between marriage and parenting.

The bill requires a school board that offers an instructional program to do all of the following in the same course and during the same year: 1) present abstinence as the preferred choice of behavior for unmarried pupils; 2) emphasize that abstinence is the only reliable way to prevent pregnancy and avoid sexually transmitted infections; 3) provide instruction in parental responsibility and the socioeconomic benefits of marriage; and 4) explain pregnancy, prenatal development, and childbirth. The bill also permits a school board to provide the instructional program to pupils while the pupils are separated from members of the opposite sex.

Under current law, the instructional program must also do all of the following:

1) use instructional methods and materials that do not promote bias against pupils of any race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnic or cultural background or against sexually active pupils or children with disabilities; 2) promote self-esteem and positive interpersonal skills, with an emphasis on healthy relationships; and 3) identify counseling, medical, and legal resources for survivors of sexual abuse and assault, including resources for escaping violent relationships. This bill replaces item 1, above, with a reference to a provision under current law that prohibits discrimination in public schools.

Current law defines "medically accurate information" as information that satisfies all of the following: 1) the information is supported by the weight of research conducted in compliance with accepted scientific methods; 2) where appropriate, the information is published in peer-reviewed journals; and 3) the information is recognized as accurate by relevant leading professional organizations or agencies, such as the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, or the American Academy of Pediatrics. Current law defines "age appropriate" as suitable to a particular age group of pupils based on the developing cognitive and emotional capacity of and behaviors typical for the age group. Current law permits a school district to eliminate from the human sexuality and development curriculum information that is not age appropriate.

This bill modifies the definition for "medically accurate information" to mean information that is scientifically-based and published, where appropriate, in peer-reviewed journals and textbooks. The bill also modifies the definition of "age-appropriate" to mean suitable to a particular age group of pupils based on their developing cognitive and emotional capacity and consistent with adolescent development and community standards.

Current law permits a pupil's parent or guardian to request that the pupil be exempt from participating in the instructional program. Current law also requires each school board that provides an instructional program to distribute an outline of the curriculum to the parents or guardians of each pupil enrolled in the district. This bill modifies the exemption to clarify that an exempted pupil will still receive instruction on how to recognize, avoid, prevent, and halt physically or psychologically intrusive or abusive situations. The bill also modifies the exemption to clarify that an exempted high school pupil will receive instruction in physiology and hygiene and the effects of alcohol and controlled substances on the body unless the pupil has also been exempted from this instruction. The bill provides that the school district must provide an explanation of these exemptions along with the outline of the curriculum.

Current law requires each school board that elects not to offer an instructional program to notify each pupil's parent or guardian of this fact. This bill eliminates that requirement. Current law also requires the state superintendent to apply for federal funds to implement an evidence-based teen pregnancy prevention program.

This bill requires the state superintendent to apply for all federal funds allocated for providing instruction in any of the recommended or required topics.

Current law requires each school district that offers an instructional program to appoint an advisory committee composed of parents, teachers, school administrators, pupils, health care professionals, members of the clergy, and other residents of the school district. The committee is required under current law to review the curriculum at least every three years. This bill specifies that the purpose of the committee is to advise the school board on the design and implementation of the curriculum and to review the curriculum every three years. The bill also provides that no one category of member may constitute more than one fifth of the membership of the committee and no more than one quarter of the committee may be made up of employees of the school district or their spouses or members of the school board or their spouses.

Under current law, a volunteer health care provider (provider) may apply to the Department of Administration to be permitted to provide health care services without charge in a school or nonprofit agency. If the provider wishes to provide services at a school, the provider must file the application jointly with the school board or, if the school is a charter school, the governing body of the school. "Volunteer health care provider" is defined under current law as a physician, dentist or dental hygienist, registered nurse, practical nurse, nurse-midwife, nurse practitioner, optometrist, physician assistant, or dietitian who receives no income from the practice of that health care profession or who receives no income from the practice of that health care profession when providing services at the school. Under current law, the provider may provide instruction in human growth and development if the instructional program complies with the requirements above. This bill prevents a provider from providing instruction in human growth and development.

Who's behind it

4 senators are its ⁠. All 4 are Republicans.

23 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 27 names

Authors (4)

Signed on in support (23)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There were 11 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Education vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 0 · Oct 27, 2011

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote on an amendment

Passed, 17 to 15 · Nov 2, 2011

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Senate amendment 11 laid on table, Ayes 17, Noes 15”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote on an amendment

Passed, 25 to 7 · Nov 2, 2011

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Senate amendment 7 adopted, Ayes 25, Noes 7”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote on an amendment

Passed, 17 to 15 · Nov 2, 2011

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Senate amendment 9 laid on table, Ayes 17, Noes 15”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 17 to 15 · Nov 2, 2011 · 1 didn't vote

See how each of the 33 senators voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 17, Noes 15”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote to pass it

Passed, 60 to 34 · Mar 13, 2012 · 3 didn't vote

See how each of the 97 representatives voted

D: Democrat, I: Independent, R: Republican

Yes (60)

Didn't vote (3)

Official motion: “Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 60, Noes 34, Paired 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 60 to 34 · Mar 13, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 3 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 60 to 34 · Mar 13, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 4 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 59 to 35 · Mar 13, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 5 laid on table, Ayes 59, Noes 35”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 60 to 34 · Mar 13, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 6 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 58 to 36 · Mar 13, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 7 laid on table, Ayes 58, Noes 36”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 10, 2012

    The new law was published.

  2. Apr 6, 2012

    The governor signed it. It became 2011 Wisconsin Act 216.

  3. Mar 29, 2012

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Mar 13, 2012

    The Assembly passed it too, 60 to 34.

  5. Jan 27, 2012

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  6. Nov 7, 2011

    The Assembly received it.

  7. Nov 2, 2011

    The Senate passed it, 17 to 15.

  8. Nov 2, 2011

    The Senate adopted it.

  9. Nov 2, 2011

    The Senate adopted it, 25 to 7.

  10. Nov 2, 2011

    “Placed at the foot of the calendar of 11-2-2011” (the official wording)

  11. Oct 27, 2011

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 4 to 3.

  12. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 7 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 6, Noes 1” (the official wording)

  13. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 7 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education” (the official wording)

  14. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 6 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education” (the official wording)

  15. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 5 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education” (the official wording)

  16. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 4 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education” (the official wording)

  17. Oct 27, 2011

    “Report introduction of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education” (the official wording)

  18. Oct 25, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  19. Oct 19, 2011

    The committee held a public hearing.

  20. Oct 14, 2011

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Education.

  21. Oct 14, 2011

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Oct 14, 2011 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Lazich, Galloway, Grothman and Leibham;Cosponsored by Representatives Thiesfeldt, Bernier, Bies, Brooks, Craig, Jacque, Kleefisch, Knodl, Kooyenga, T. Larson, Litjens, Meyer, Nass, Nygren, A. Ott, Pridemore, Ripp, Spanbauer, Strachota, Stroebel, Wynn, Ziegelbauer and LeMahieu

  2. Oct 14, 2011 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Education

  3. Oct 19, 2011 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Oct 25, 2011 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Oct 26, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Grothman

  6. Oct 26, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Grothman

  7. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  8. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report introduction of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education

  9. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report introduction of Senate Amendment 4 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education

  10. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report introduction of Senate Amendment 5 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education

  11. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report introduction of Senate Amendment 6 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education

  12. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report introduction of Senate Amendment 7 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0 by committee on Education

  13. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 7 recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 6, Noes 1

  14. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 4, Noes 3

  15. Oct 27, 2011 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  16. Nov 1, 2011 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 11-2-2011 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  17. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Placed at the foot of the calendar of 11-2-2011

  18. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Read a second time

  19. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 7 adopted, Ayes 25, Noes 7

  20. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 8 offered by Senators Grothman and T. Cullen

  21. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 8 adopted

  22. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 9 offered by Senators Vinehout, Holperin, C. Larson, King, Shilling, T. Cullen, S. Coggs, Risser, Miller, Hansen, Erpenbach and Taylor

  23. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 9 laid on table, Ayes 17, Noes 15

  24. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 10 offered by Senator Lazich

  25. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 10 adopted

  26. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 11 offered by Senators C. Larson, Holperin, Vinehout, Taylor, Miller, Risser, S. Coggs, T. Cullen, Shilling, King and Erpenbach

  27. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 11 laid on table, Ayes 17, Noes 15

  28. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 12 offered by Senators C. Larson, Holperin, Vinehout, Taylor, Miller, Risser, Carpenter, S. Coggs, T. Cullen, Shilling, King and Erpenbach

  29. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 12 adopted

  30. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 13 offered by Senators C. Larson and Erpenbach

  31. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 13 laid on table

  32. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  33. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  34. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 17, Noes 15

  35. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  36. Nov 7, 2011 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  37. Jan 27, 2012 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Rules

  38. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 11:05 A.M. on 3-13-2012 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22

  39. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  40. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Roys

  41. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 withdrawn and returned to author

  42. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 offered by Representative Roys

  43. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 withdrawn and returned to author

  44. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 offered by Representative Zamarripa

  45. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34

  46. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 offered by Representative C. Taylor

  47. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34

  48. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 5 offered by Representative Hintz

  49. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 5 laid on table, Ayes 59, Noes 35

  50. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 6 offered by Representatives Pasch, Pocan and Zamarripa

  51. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 6 laid on table, Ayes 60, Noes 34

  52. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 7 offered by Representatives Vruwink, Pasch, Pope-Roberts, Hintz, Milroy, Sinicki, Danou, Zepnick, Jorgensen and Doyle

  53. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 7 laid on table, Ayes 58, Noes 36

  54. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  55. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  56. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 60, Noes 34, Paired 2

  57. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  58. Mar 13, 2012 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  59. Mar 22, 2012 · Senate

    LRB correction

  60. Mar 22, 2012 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled on 3-22-2012

  61. Mar 29, 2012 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 3-29-2012

  62. Apr 6, 2012 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 4-5-2012. 2011 Wisconsin Act 216

  63. Apr 10, 2012 · Senate

    Published 4-19-2012

Terms on this page

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote