Call to Action: Dry Creek Fetal Development Video Parent/Community Input - Dec. 1-19
-information provided by Dry Creek Advocates and from the DCJESD website: https://www.drycreek.k12.ca.us/departments/educational-services/sexual-health-curriculum-review
At the Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District (DCJESD) August 14, 2025 Board meeting, there was an attempt to introduce the Baby Olivia video by Live Action into the curriculum outside of the standard review and adoption procedures. Following this, the Board directed the district to begin a formal curriculum development process for selecting an appropriate fetal development video.
The district is now evaluating five different fetal development videos, including Baby Olivia, through the established review process. Families will have a chance to preview all options and provide input during the public review window of December 1-19, 2025 in person at the district office or links can be found HERE online.
CALL TO ACTION: Please fill out the parent/community input forms! You can find all the information online (link is above) or in person at the district office.
The following are some important factors to consider in our opposition to the Baby Olivia video:
Why “Baby Olivia” Is Controversial / Potentially Inappropriate for K-8 Instruction — with Evidence
Origin & Advocacy Bias
The video was produced by Live Action, an explicitly anti-abortion organization. Critics argue it is not purely educational but has an ideological purpose. The Washington Post
According to The Washington Post, medical experts say the video is “misleading” and “part of a larger movement … to instill anti-abortion sentiment by manipulating people’s emotions rather than truly sharing science-based facts.” The Washington Post
Timeline / Dating Controversy
The video uses weeks post-fertilization to date development, rather than gestational age (weeks from last menstrual period), which is how pregnancy is normally dated in clinical settings. This shift affects when “milestones” appear in the video. The Washington Post
Some medical professionals argue that this method of dating can be “potentially confusing” because it makes development milestones appear earlier than most medical-community timelines.
Medical Accuracy Disputed
According to The Washington Post, OB/GYN Michael Belmonte (member of ACOG) says the video mischaracterizes how early survival outside the womb is possible, and that Live Action’s depiction of a “heartbeat” at six weeks is problematic because the sound they use is not what would actually occur at that stage. The Washington Post
Pro-choice OBGYNs have criticized the video as “misleading … in that it shows development in weeks after fertilization … rather than weeks from last menstrual period which is how healthcare providers date pregnancy.” Fox News
According to SIECUS (a well-known sex-education advocacy group), the video spreads “anti-abortion disinformation” and exaggerates or misrepresents fetal development. SIECUS
Emotional / Persuasive Framing
Critics (including ACOG) claim the video is “designed to manipulate the emotions of viewers.” AP News
According to TeenVogue, some educators and medical professionals view it as propaganda. Teen Vogue
Legislative / Educational Policy Concerns
There have been bills in multiple states (e.g., North Dakota, Tennessee, Iowa) that require or strongly encourage showing Baby Olivia in schools.
Some of the criticism around these bills is that they force a politically affiliated video into curricula (i.e., it's not a neutral scientific resource). newsandsentinel
According to TeenVogue, even though the video is brief, critics argue that it is being used in a way that “undermines medically accurate, comprehensive sex education” by privileging an ideologically driven perspective. Teen Vogue
Questionable Expert Review
While Live Action says they had doctors review the video, many of those professionals are affiliated with pro-life organizations (e.g., Christian medical associations). The Washington Post notes that many of the endorsing professionals come from right-leaning or religiously affiliated groups. The Washington Post
This raises concern about conflict of interest: the medical endorsement may not be fully independent or neutral.
Why These Issues Matter for K–8 Instruction (Especially in Public Schools)
Age-Appropriateness & Critical Thinking: In K–8, students are still developing the capacity to assess bias and motivation behind materials. A video with ideological framing could shape beliefs more than inform scientific understanding.
Medically Accurate Instruction Requirements: Many state educational policies (including California) emphasize medically accurate and age-appropriate content for human development. Using a video with contested medical claims may undermine that requirement.
Parental Rights / Notification: Since this content is politically and morally charged, showing it in class could require extra sensitivity, parent notification, or opt-out mechanisms (depending on your district’s policies).
Scientific Literacy: It’s important for students to see development presented in a way consistent with clinical and biological standards (e.g., gestational dating), so they develop accurate mental models of human development.
Video Links
DCJESD Board of Trustees
Please take some time over December 1-19th to fill out the parent/community input form. After the review window closes, the committee will thoughtfully consider all feedback. A final recommendation will be presented to the Board of Trustees in January 2026. If approved, the updated Positive Prevention Plus curriculum and the fetal development video will be implemented in 8th-grade classrooms beginning Spring 2026.
Feedback form: https://forms.gle/jSZrXwPzpUShHkFZA
