Board approves amended child abuse and human trafficking prevention guidelines after debate over 'myths' and resource lists

The Utah State Board of Education on January 28 approved amended minimum guidelines for child abuse and human trafficking prevention materials after an extended debate over wording, resource lists and the board’s role in approving curriculum.

Vice Chair Earl proposed a three‑part amendment to Draft 3 of the minimum guidelines: (1) replace an embedded rubric by referencing rule R277‑630, (2) remove 'myths' language from the materials because prevention research shows repeating myths can reinforce false beliefs, and (3) remove a separate 'additional resources' list from each draft. "In section 1, they have a rubric, and I'm asking that it reference the law, r 2 7 7 6 3 0 child *** abuse and human trafficking prevention training and instruction," Earl said, framing the board's intent to rely on the rule rather than attach a rubric.

Board members debated several amendments. Member Klein moved to amend Earl's proposal to explicitly prohibit the use or inclusion of the additional resources in curriculum or implementation; Klein argued that recurring "but not limited to" language would otherwise allow submitters to include those materials. The board rejected that prohibition by roll call, 14 no to 1 yes (Member Klein the lone yes). The board then took a separate motion — offered by Member Carey and seconded — to move SafeUT out of the 'additional resources' section and place it under prevention resources for both child abuse and human trafficking; that amendment passed 9 to 6.

Staff and prevention coordinator Tanya Alberno repeatedly clarified the document's function. Alberno said the minimum guidelines are "a guidance document that we provide to any organization that wants to submit materials," and that every set of materials "still comes back to the board for review" through the established submission and approval process. Deputy Superintendent Patty Norman likewise noted the document does not itself operate as a rule and that materials must be vetted and returned to the board for approval under code.

The board divided the question so the rubric reference and removal of myths could be considered separately from the additional resources deletion. Items 1 and 2 — adding the R277‑630 reference and striking the myths sections (examples cited on pages 12, 18 and 19 of the parent/guardian draft) — passed unanimously. The board later voted to remove the remaining additional resources from each of the three documents; that action passed 11 to 4, with no votes recorded from Member Reel, Member Norton, Member Lear and Member Straight. The underlying motion — approving the minimum guidelines as amended — passed 13 to 2, with Member Boggess and Member Klein voting no.

Board members raised practical concerns during debate: some said listing example resources could mislead submitters into relying on materials the board might later reject; others urged the board to provide pathways for well‑vetted resources. A specific point of contention arose over whether SafeUT links or social posts point to the Trevor Project; Member Klein asserted SafeUT refers users to Trevor Project resources in some posts, a claim Vice Chair Earl asked Klein to document for staff review.

Next steps: staff will update Draft 3 to reflect the board's amendments and process the submission, review and approval steps required by Utah code. Because the minimum guidelines are guidance rather than a codified rule, staff emphasized materials still return to the board for approval before statewide use.