Tuesday, June 24. 2008
As this site has been reporting for some time, more and more states have been turning down US abstinence-until-marriage grants. By December of 2007, a mere seven months ago, around 15 states had turned down the money: In January Arizona became the 16th state, followed just two months later by Iowa.
Now, an article in today's Associated Press reports that participation in the program is down 40 percent over two years, with 28 states still in (barely half) and two more saying that they're leaving.
Some $50 million has been budgeted for this year, and financially strapped states might be expected to want their share. But many have doubts that the program does much, if any good, and they're frustrated by chronic uncertainty that it will even be kept in existence. They also have to chip in state money in order to receive the federal grants.
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat, made his decision to leave based on the congressionally mandated curriculum, which teaches "the social, psychological and health gains of abstaining from sexual activity." Instructors must teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects.
"It was just too strict," said Emily Hajek, policy adviser to Culver. "We believe local providers have the knowledge to teach what's going to be best in those situations, what kind of information will help those young people be safe. You cannot be that prescriptive about how it has to be taught."
For the full story, click here.
Wednesday, June 18. 2008
Check out this letter to the editor of the Little Falls Evening Times by Galen Sherwin, the Director of the New York Civil Liberties Union's Reproductive Rights Project. Sherwin takes the paper to task for failing to tell its readers that a so-called "character education program" the local school board is considering is the product of an anti-abortion organization. And she calls out abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for their inaccuracies and ineffectiveness.
Your May 16 article, "Little Falls school board discusses character education program," omits that Care Net, the organization proposing the program, defines its mission as "presenting the gospel of our Lord to women with crisis pregnancies." In other words, its true mission is preventing abortion…Based on Care Net's mission, and on the description in your article, we can only assume that the proposed "character building" program is an "abstinence-only-until-marriage" program. Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, which often rely on religious messages, scientific inaccuracies and scare tactics, censor vital information students need to guard against pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.
But don't be content with this snippet. Sherwin's letter is a terrific read. For the complete version, click here.
Thursday, June 12. 2008
Reporter Murray Waas' article asks "why an organization that promotes sexual abstinence for teens received a federal grant of over a million dollars, twice what it had requested, despite the skepticism Department of Justice staffers had about the group and the fact that it refused to participate in a congressionally mandated study?"
The organization is "Best Friends," and the congressionally mandated study they refused to participate in is presumably this one — the April 2007 study that presents clear evidence that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs don’t work.
So why did "Best Friends" make the grade and hit the jackpot? According to Waas:
"Current and former staffers say it was because of Best Friends' powerful president and founder, Elayne Bennett. Not only is Bennett the wife of Bill Bennett, a former Reagan and Bush administration official and conservative political commentator, but she is also personally close to the chief administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), J. Robert Flores."
Read on…
Friday, May 30. 2008
This week's Boston Globe reports on a successful instructional program developed by a local nurse at a private medical practice. The pilot Smart Sex Education Program seems to have "taken the edge off for many parents by pitching sex education to them as well as to youngsters." Offered free and conducted outside of school, the private, voluntary course has "drawn rave reviews from parents, who say it has made them more comfortable about discussing the awkward subject with their children."
In addition to teaching the facts of life to middle and high school students, the creator of the course, Thu Anh Lewin, a nurse at Pediatrics West, holds classes for parents, "encouraging them to become the primary teacher about sexuality, sexually transmitted diseases, and healthy relationships."
Beverly Jean Pinney, a local mother and course participant, said she appreciated Lewin's advice. "One thing that surprised me is, [Lewin] said don't have 'The Talk' with the kids. It's not one talk. It's a whole bunch of little talks [and] finding teachable moments."
For the entire Boston Globe article, and more on Lewin's instructional program, including her format and curriculum for different groups, click here.
Friday, May 23. 2008
This past Tuesday, The Daytona Beach News-Journal Online featured a terrific editorial by local mom Lynn Koller. It's inspired by her son, a 7th grader in a school that teaches federally funded Pure Energy Abstinence Education Program. The article kicks off with him telling her about that day's speaker, who urged "that everyone abstain from sex until marriage, because sex outside of marriage can cause serious physical and psychological problems."
Smart, funny, and spot-on, Koller's editorial reads like a checklist of all that is ineffective, inaccurate, and discriminatory about abstinence-only programs. Highlights of her critique include the following observations:
• The program's insistence that sex outside of marriage can cause serious physical and psychological problems "teaches the children of single parents that their mothers or fathers are engaging in illicit acts of danger."
• "The message blatantly discriminates against those who fall somewhere outside of heterosexual on the vast spectrum of human sexuality, who do not desire marriage, or are prevented by law from marrying in Florida."
• As a recipient of federal abstinence-only dollars, the Pure Energy program isn't allowed to discuss contraception with teens except to emphasize failure rates; this means that in addition to failing to provide teens with medically accurate and complete information about sex, the programs also fail to teach how to use condoms to prevent pregnancy and diseases.
• The speakers "have no credentials in health, education, or any related area," and they are teaching opinions as facts. (Per Koller: "It's not teaching; it's preaching.")
• "Abstinence-only programs don't work, in spite of our government investing more than $1 billion in them over the past decade. Major studies have repeatedly demonstrated that these programs are unsuccessful in reducing teenage sex, STDs or unplanned pregnancy. The April 2007 study commissioned by Congress found that the programs have essentially no effect."
As for the argument from other parents that abstinence-only programs do no harm because their children receive proper information at home," Koller will have none of it:
These arguments are seriously flawed. While students may receive sufficient sex education at home, as a community we cannot tolerate intolerance toward others promoted in our public schools and cannot dismiss the effect on our community. We cannot allow unqualified "coaches" to teach students that condoms are ineffective barriers against pregnancy and disease. We cannot allow our public schools to be soapboxes for evangelists."
But don't settle for these tidbits. Go read the full editorial.
Thursday, April 24. 2008
Shelby Knox grew up as a conservative Southern Baptist in Texas turned progressive activist and documentary film subject. She recently graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a degree in Political Science. Throughout her college career, Shelby traveled across the nation to speak to young people about the importance of comprehensive sex education and the power of youth activism, using the film that carries her name, The Education of Shelby Knox, as a vehicle for discussion. She currently lives in New York City and is a full time speaker and organizer working with progressive organizations to promote sex education, women’s rights, and youth empowerment.
Yesterday the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, chaired by the Honorable Henry Waxman, held the first ever oversight hearing on the effectiveness of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs – programs that have been around for 25 years and have received over a billion dollars in federal funding in the past 10 years alone. (For the Committee's website, which includes Waxman's opening statement and the testimony of all of the expert witnesses, click here.)
Although long overdue, the hearing couldn’t be timelier. Teen birth rates are on the rise, one in four teen girls have a sexually transmitted infection, and Congress will decide this spring whether the widely criticized abstinence-only-until-marriage programs deserve another 176 million dollar chance, despite mounting evidence of their ineffectiveness and growing public opinion in favor of comprehensive sexual education.
I literally got a front row seat to watch the action, since I was the youngest member to testify before the panel. I applaud Chairman Waxman and his staff for inviting not just one but two young people to appear on the panel: our voices are far too often left out conversations about our education and sexual health, even though we are the ones who must suffer the consequences of the omissions and misinformation characteristic of abstinence-only programs like the one taught in my high school in Lubbock, Texas.
What did the secularized abstinence-only program for students in my school district look like? Well, it was taught by the same pastor who officiated at my religious purity pledge ceremony. Many of the students were already having sex and needed information to protect their health. But our teacher only mentioned condoms to talk lengthily, and inaccurately, about their alleged "ineffectiveness," explaining in graphic detail, and with even more graphic pictures, the sexually transmitted diseases students could get if we trusted our health to a “flimsy piece of latex.”
It was only later in my life that I learned that latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing pregnancy, HIV transmission, and several STDs. In fact, research by Dr. John Sanitelli, who also testified before the panel yesterday, and has a great blog up, suggests that 86 percent of the decline in teen pregnancy rates among 15-19 year olds between 1995 and 2002 was the result of improved contraceptive use.
But back in my high school class, where we were all too intimidated or embarrassed to ask for clarification, it seemed as if sex with a condom was equivalent to sex without one. Our teacher also touched on the ills of masturbation and warned against the dangers of homosexual sex.
One demonstration our teacher used left little doubt as to our worth as a future spouse or partner if we were to engage in sex before marriage. He would routinely pull an often squirming and reluctant, and always female, volunteer onto the stage, take out a toothbrush that looked like it had been used to scrub toilets and ask if she would brush her teeth with it. When she predictably refused, he pulled out another toothbrush, this one pristine in its original box, and asked her if she would brush her teeth with that one. When she answered in the affirmative, he turned to the assembly and said, “If you have sex before marriage, you are a dirty toothbrush.”
Max Siegel, a Policy Associate for the AIDS Alliance for Children, Youth, and Families, and the other youth member of the panel, shared a far more tragic story about the effects of abstinence-only-until-marriage programming with the committee. As a gay teen who knew he could not legally marry, he never really connected to the abstinence-is-forever message that seemed to be the only alternative for gay youth. Still, he knew enough to bring a condom when he had sex with a man six years older. But when his partner refused, Max lacked the skills to negotiate for condom use or walk away. They had sex without any protection, and Max contracted HIV.
Stories like mine, and stories like Max's, are repeated across the country, over and over again. They represent the faces and lives, not the numbers, behind abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. Young people deserve more: a more comprehensive approach that gives them the tools to make responsible decisions about their sexual health.
Congress, we now know for sure, has heard loud and clear that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are not only ineffective and bad public health, but can also be life-threatening. Now, the question is what, if anything, will they do about it?
Tuesday, April 22. 2008
"Being a civil liberties activist isn't about the big events for me anymore. It's about the harder conversations I have with someone who doesn't share my views or having the courage to put friendships on the line for my beliefs in what is right." [Angelina Momanyi]
Congratulations to Angelina Momanyi. Earlier this month the ACLU of Minnesota announced that the Blake School senior was a recipient of the 2008 ACLU Youth Activist Scholarship. She is the first-ever winner from Minnesota of this national honor, which is awarded to 15 seniors from across the country each year. As a peer educator with Planned Parenthood in Minneapolis, Angelina volunteered 230 hours during the 2006-07 school year to training high school students to be educators in reproductive health and providing them with opportunities to teach in area schools, churches, and community centers.
Prior to attending the Blake School in eighth grade, Angelina was in the Minneapolis Public Schools system, which does not have a strong sexual-education program, she said. "I never got it [comprehensive sex education] in school," she said. "A lot of my friends still don't have that confidence and the correct information."
Angelina called the "regression" of sexual education in the United States "counterintuitive," noting that teen pregnancy rates have increased in the last few years, after a long period of decline. The birth rate among 15-19 year-old girls rose 3 percent in 2006 after declining 34 percent between 1991 and 2005, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
In addition to speaking with state representatives about comprehensive sexual education in public schools at the 2007 Minnesota Youth Lobby Day, Angelina helped plan the 2008 Youth Lobby Day as well, which was held April 8 at the Capitol.
The youth who participated April 8 lobbied for the passage of the Responsible Family Life and Sexuality Education Programs bill, authored by Neva Walker, DFL-Minneapolis, and introduced in the House last month. The bill would require public schools to provide sexual education that emphasizes abstinence while also including education about contraception and disease prevention.
Since 2000, the ACLU has awarded scholarships annually to honor the efforts of graduating seniors who have demonstrated a strong commitment to civil liberties and civil rights through student activism. Along with 14 other high-school seniors from across the country, Angelina received a $5,000 college scholarship. She will attend Macalester College next year and plans to pursue a career in public health and policy-making. Click here and scroll down to read her scholarship essay.
Tuesday, April 15. 2008
Citizens in Houston are trying to understand how two teen pregnancies ended badly in public restrooms.
The Houston Chronicle first reported on this story last week, about an eighth grader who didn’t know she was pregnant until she miscarried in an airplane. "We are dealing with a scared child at this point," said Keith Lovelace, an investigator with the Houston Police Department.
Three days later another story about a fourteen-year-old made headlines: this time the teen in question gave birth to a full-term baby, and allegedly tried to flush it down the toilet of a school bathroom.
The intensity of these tragedies, which followed one after another, have led to a lot of soul searching in Texas, where state law says schools that teach sex education must stress abstinence as the preferred option.
Texas received $17,345,764 in federal funds for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th, 2006 — more than any other state. Yet teen pregnancy data released last year by the non-profit group Child Trends found Texas ranked first among teenage birth rates, with 62 births per 1,000 girls 15-19 years old, and fifth in the nation when it comes to the number of teens in that same age group who become pregnant.
"It's been that way for years. We're seeing no improvement," said Rochelle Tafolla, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas. "At the same time, we're seeing a push for abstinence-until-marriage programs — that's if you have a sex education program."
Even state officials admit that "It's entirely feasible…that a Texas student could graduate from high school without being taught about birth control options."
And now these young women.
Something needs to change. An op-ed in The Houston Chronicle called for comprehensive sex education, noting of the teenager who gave birth in her school’s bathroom that "adults in her state pretended that 'just say no' was enough to protect her from pregnancy."
It’s time to stop pretending and instead give students the information they need to make good decisions.
Monday, April 7. 2008
That's Gina Castro being quoted in an article that appeared in this past Monday's San Antonio Express-News, in Texas. She's the administrator who oversees the school health advisory council for Harlandale. Of the 16 districts in Bexar County, where the teen birth rate is nearly double the national average, Harlandale is one of the poorest, with a majority of students coming from low-income homes.
When Ms. Castro talks about why she decided to recommend "Worth the Wait," a federally funded abstinence-only curriculum that's free to all school districts, it's a simple dollars and cents explanation. "We had not really allotted any funds to buy a curriculum," Ms. Castro said, "so it came at the exact perfect time."
On the face of it, Ms. Castro's decision makes sense - except for two not-so-minor details. First off, it's increasingly hard to ignore the evidence that abstinence-only curricula may not actually be all that nice since they don't do a whole heck of a lot to help teens. As the ACLU's Marshall Bright noted in a post late last month, a 2007 study by Mathematica found that students who participated in abstinence-only programs are just as likely to have sex as their peers who did not participate. (By the way, as the San Antonio Express-News article notes, one of the requirements for federally funded abstinence programs is that they teach contraceptives in terms of their failure rates. So what are the chances that a Harlandale school student who does decide to have sex is going to bother with using any?)
Or consider the findings of a 2005 study of adolescents who took virginity pledges - a common feature of abstinence-only programs. It found no difference between pledgers and nonpledgers regarding the rate of sexually transmitted diseases, and only a slight difference in terms of the age of sexual debut. Pledgers waited a bit longer, but most still had sex before marriage, and fewer pledgers than nonpledgers used a condom their first time.
By contrast, researchers from the University of Washington concluded that adolescents who receive comprehensive sex education are significantly less likely to become pregnant than adolescents who receive abstinence-only-until-marriage or no formal sex education.
More importantly, even administrators for low-income school districts, like Harlandale, do have a choice when it comes to school sex education curriculum. There's the Family Life and Sexual Health curriculum (F.L.A.S.H.), a free, downloadable comprehensive pregnancy, HIV and STD prevention curriculum available for grades 4 through college. Also available for free to school districts in Bexar County is the Big Decision, a curriculum developed locally by the medical advisor of Project WORTH, San Antonio's teen pregnancy prevention program. While stressing abstinence, it also includes medically accurate information about various forms of contraception and their effectiveness rates.
And that's really nice, especially for the students of Harlandale school district. Because youth deserve access to the factual information they need in order to make good decisions about their bodies and their lives.
Won't you please reconsider, Ms. Castro?
Friday, March 28. 2008
Researchers from the University of Washington found that adolescents who receive comprehensive sex education are significantly less likely to become pregnant than adolescents who receive abstinence-only-until-marriage or no formal sex education. The study, based on a national survey of 1,719 teens ages 15 to 19, is the first population-level evaluation of the effectiveness of both abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education programs. The results are very promising for comprehensive sex education.
According to Pamela Kohler, the study's lead author, "It is not harmful to teach teens about birth control in addition to abstinence."
This study joins a host of others that prove that abstinence-only does little and comprehensive sex education does much for our teens. The dangers of abstinence-only are nothing new – one well-known study by Mathematica found that students who participated in abstinence-only programs are just as likely to have sex as their peers who did not participate.
Yet in the face of this overwhelming evidence, 1 in 4 teens receive only abstinence-only instruction. On top of that, 9 percent of teens receive no sex education at all, particularly those in rural or poor areas. Thankfully, that leaves two-thirds of students in comprehensive sex ed. As temporarily reassuring as that might be, we cannot also lose sight of the fact that 1 in 4 teen girls have an STD.
This sobering fact also points to how much work we have left to do. The University of Washington study does not speak to how comprehensive sex ed should be implemented. Clearly this is a question to be handled carefully by both parents and administrators alike, as we continue to improve and expand the reach of comprehensive sex education programs.
Friday, March 14. 2008
Earlier this week the CDC reported that 1 in 4 teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease (STD), according to a first-of-its-kind study done of more than 800 teenage girls aged 14-19. This statistic alone should raise alarms and serve as further evidence of the increasing need for schools to implement comprehensive sex education that would educate teens about how to best protect themselves and make healthy life decisions.
Adolescent health experts, educators and members of the CDC agree. Dr. Elizabeth Alderman, an adolescent medicine specialist at Montefiore Medical Center’s Children’s Hospital in New York, said of the study, "This is pretty shocking." And she went on to note that teen girls – and boys too – need to be informed about how to protect themselves if they do have sex.
The study found that roughly half of the participants acknowledged having sex, though some teens define sex as only intercourse despite the fact that other types of intimate behavior, including oral and anal sex, can spread diseases. Among those girls who reported that they had had sex, 40 percent tested positive for an STD.
As the federal government continues to fund abstinence-only-until-marriage programs that censor important information about the effectiveness of condom usage at an alarming $176 million dollars a year, the CDC's study points to the need for communities, educators and lawmakers to start looking for ways to fund sex education programs that will keep teens informed about their health.
Thursday, March 6. 2008
Parents support comprehensive sex education. This fact has been shown -- time and time again -- despite a vocal and well-funded minority who push for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. This time, it's Floridians who overwhelmingly support comprehensive sex education. More than 90 percent believe sex education that includes information about condoms should be taught in public schools, a number that closely mirrors the national statistics on this issue. These numbers should be seen as a clear mandate to politicians in all states, yet many continue to ignore the problem.
Some politicians have taken initiative, however, such as those in Connecticut who recently drafted a bill that would authorize the state Department of Education to establish a grant program to pay for medically accurate health education for school districts that seek to participate. Opponents of the bill naturally favor abstinence-only programming instead, claiming that teaching teens to wait to have sex and teaching about condoms are mutually exclusive practices.
Yet teaching about condoms is in dire need, as one editorial from Milwaukee affirms. Sobered by the fact that the city ranks seventh in the nation for teen pregnancy, editors at the Milwaukee Journal Sentential asked parents to "imagine this is your daughter" as an unsettling reminder that teen pregnancy is a problem that affects everyone, a sentiment that Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin quickly seconded .
Perhaps if parents were to imagine the effects of poor sexuality education on their son or daughter, more of the 90 percent majority could be galvanized to action.
Wednesday, March 5. 2008
If Friday being a leap-day wasn't already reason to celebrate, it was also the day Iowa became the 17th state to publicly reject Title V funding used to support abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. This decision follows the passing of a bill last year that required sex education in Iowa to be medically and scientifically based.
In Mullica Hills, NJ, the battle rages on over peer sex education in high school, as discussed in last week's blog. Yet both nationally and locally, these parents are by far the minority. For example, in North Carolina, 90 percent of parents support comprehensive sex ed, yet few parents realized that their school's sex ed programs have been replaced by abstinence-only curricula.
Thankfully, some parents have taken notice, such as the group of parents in Cumberland County who join several other county-based parent groups to fight abstinence-only programming in their schools. Other steps are being taken as well: public educators, shamed by the state's high teen pregnancy rates, have begun looking at alternatives to abstinence-only approaches. One program that has received an extremely positive response from parents and educators is Teen PEP, the same program that has raised controversy in Mullica Hills.
Thursday, February 28. 2008
Greetings from the Take Issue, Take Charge guest bloggers! We are writing from the ACLU of Pennsylvania's Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project.
Marshall Bright is an undergraduate at the University of Pennsylvania who was instrumental in raising awareness of the problems with abstinence-only education in her private, all-female high school.Stephanie Chando is a Master of Social Work Candidate at the Penn School of Social Policy and Practice who became interested in advocating for comprehensive sex ed after evaluating two sex ed programs in Trenton, NJ. Sarah Coburn is a recent graduate of Smith College and currently serves as Project Coordinator at the Duvall Project whose main focus is advocating for comprehensive sexuality education throughout Pennsylvania.
Together, we have taken issue with abstinence-only-until-marriage programs and are devoted to the advancement of comprehensive sexuality education.We're eager to share our thoughts with you and openly welcome your comments:
The Philadelphia Inquirer recently reported on a high school in Mullica Hill, NJ, that is drawing criticism from concerned parents over their peer-education sex ed program. These parents have organized and even created a Web site for parents to sign a petition and get a look at the "very graphic" curriculum their teens are being subjected to. Some of the "disturbing" material chosen for its particularly lurid content, includes information on things that kids don't know about (masturbation), things they should never know exist (condoms) and things they should never consider (tolerance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people).
Depressing and intolerant as that may seem, students and parents in other communities are taking positive steps toward education, such as a group of teens in Utah who lobbied their senators for full disclosure in sex ed.
In addition, not all parents are as reactionary as those few in Mullica Hill, NJ. In fact, some open-minded and involved parents are becoming advocates themselves, such as a group of parents in Pittsburgh who have started a petition for comprehensive sex ed. They are supported in their efforts by the ACLU of Pennsylvania.
In a warmer part of the country, Palm Beach County, FL, has realized that abstinence-only programming won't help their state's teen pregnancy woes; they are set to enact in April a sex-ed curriculum that teaches sixth graders about STD's and seventh graders about condoms.
Peer education is taking off on the West Coast as well. In the San Fernando Valley, one program, Promoting Alternatives for Teen Health, is a peer-to-peer curriculum aimed mainly at poor Latinos. I wonder if the concerned New Jersey parents could look at the grim statistics on HIV infections and pregnancy rates amongst these teens and still insist they shouldn't learn about condoms.
Another grim reason for increased sex education: unprotected oral sex may be more dangerous than originally thought. A recent study links unprotected oral sex to certain dangerous side-effects, including some rare throat and mouth cancers that previously were seen mainly in older heavy smokers. We can therefore expect to see such anomalous cancers in youth become more common if abstinence-only programs continue to preach a message where sex is shrouded in mystery and protection is never discussed.
Friday, January 18. 2008
We just got word that the governor of Arizona announced today that she has turned down federal funding for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs! Arizona is now the 16th state that no longer accepts funds for these programs.
More information to come...
***UPDATE***
Here are some snippets from the ACLU of Arizona's press release:
Napolitano made the announcement to eliminate the abstinence-only funds from her FY 2009 General Fund Executive Budget at a luncheon today sponsored by Planned Parenthood Arizona, stating she does not believe Arizona should spend money on "an educational system that doesn't educate."
Napolitano added she will send a letter next week to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announcing her intention to reject the federal, Title V abstinence-only funds, affirmatively refusing any money that will not fund "real, complete sex education in our schools."
|
|
|
Find out what is happening in your state to Take Issue, Take Charge today.
|
Take Issue, Take Charge Today
We all want healthy families and teens, but what can we do to help foster these goals in our communities? For starters we can ensure that teens have the education they need to make responsible choices when it comes to sex. We can teach them about the benefits of abstinence while making sure that they have the information and tools they need to prevent unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases if they do start having sex. Together we can Take Issue, Take Charge!
|
![ACLU Take Issue Take Charge - Life, Liberty & Reproductive Freedom [image]](images-v2/titc_header.gif)
![1 - Take Issue [image]](images-v2/1_takeissue.gif)
![2 - Take Charge [image]](images-v2/2_takecharge.gif)
![3 - Take Action [image]](images-v2/3_takeaction.gif)
