Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Sex & relationships education in schools (England & Wales) - tell the Government what you think....

59 replies

MylinhMumsnet · 20/03/2013 15:35

Hello

Do you agree with how and when sex and relationships education (SRE) is taught in schools, and - if not - what do you think can be done to improve it? We've been asked by The Sex Education Forum (SEF) to draw your attention to the current Government consultation on the National Curriculum.

The SEF says that the proposals in this consultation make no change to the status of SRE or PSHE in schools in terms of support or funding.

In fact the SEF says a closer look at the proposed curriculum reveals that the names for external genitalia have been omitted from the list of body parts taught to children at Key Stage 1; that the term 'puberty' has been left out of both primary and secondary school curricula (and only referenced in the phrase "growing into adults"); and that the terms 'adolescence', 'foetal development', 'fertilisation' and 'sexual health' have been removed from the Key Stage 3 curriculum entirely, and replaced with "the effect of drugs on behaviour, health and life processes" and "the structure and function of male and female reproductive organs" without details of hormones. This in effect, argues the SEF, delays the teaching of contraception until Key Stage 4 when pupils are 14-16.

What are your thoughts on the proposed changes to SRE teaching in schools? Is 14-16 too late to introduce the teaching of contraception? What about omitting the integral stages of 'puberty' and 'adolescence' from science terminology in schools?

One in 3 young people says their SRE is "poor" or "very poor" (Sex Education Forum, 2008), and around one in four young people says they don't get any SRE in school at all; of those that do, around a quarter (26%) say their SRE teacher isn't able to teach it well (Brook survey 2011). A Mumsnet survey in 2011 told us that a very high proportion of parents (98%) are happy for their children to attend SRE lessons and that 89% of parents think SRE should start in primary schools, from the ages of 4 to 11 years. Furthermore 90% think there should be a statutory duty on all schools, including faith schools and academies (currently able to opt-out), to deliver comprehensive SRE.

If you want to engage with the consultation, it closes on 16th April and you can submit your responses via this link. You may also, of course, wish to comment on other aspects of the curriculum consultation; as ever, do please use this thread to let us know what you think.

Thanks
MNHQ

OP posts:
bangwhizz · 22/03/2013 12:48

'And of course 11-13 year olds need to know about contraception.

No they don't.having sex with an under 13 is statutory rape and it should not be normalised'

TeaAndCakeOrDeath · 22/03/2013 12:02

I'm possibly biased as mine are too little to for this yet (2 and still in utero) but I work with teenagers (youth worker actually doing a sex and relationships project at the minute due to the utter lack of knowledge in some of the teens at my centre) and am shocked by this.

So we're ok to teach children that they have knees, ears and toes but forbidden to teach them penis, testicles and labia? Its just some other bits of their body isnt it? And quite important bits they learn the proper names of in case of (god forbid) them ever having to explain that those bits hurt or have been touched inappropriatly etc?

The term 'puberty' has been left out of both primary and secondary school curricula and only referenced in the phrase "growing into adults" - again another perfectly normal process that happens to everyone that we are stigmatising by not talking about it? Would we not talk about digestion or respiration? Why do we 'hush up' anything possibly related to sex, are we actively trying to teach children its 'dirty'?

Lastly, delaying the teaching of contraception until Key Stage 4 when pupils are 14-16 is shutting the stable door long after the horse has bolted.

16.2 years is the average age for first time sex according to the lastest research I read but to be the average, a significant number of children will have had sex/engaged in some sexual activity far before this. It should be taught, as a fact of life, from a very early age - "women can choose when to have a baby and if they dont want one yet, they can take a special tablet every day" for example.

Its no wonder with this shoddy sex education that children are receiving we have such a high pregnancy rate, such rampent transmission of infections and such lack of knowledge - we hammer algebra and formation of an oxbow lake down their throat at school but refuse to adequately teach them something that might have massive ramifications on their life or might give them a very serious medical condition? Its completely stupid, utter madness.

DeadWomanWalking · 22/03/2013 10:56

That should say Europe, not the world.

DeadWomanWalking · 22/03/2013 10:54

And the government wonder why we have one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the world! Hmm

Teaching about contraception at 14-16 is much too late most kids will already be having sex by then. It should be tackled in Year 7. Why can't they just bloody teach this stuff honestly, why all the bloody pussyfooting around and omitting certain words from the curriculum?

motherinferior · 22/03/2013 10:38

Contraception and sexual health shouldn't be a bolt-on; they should be an integral part of the curriculum.

ouryve · 22/03/2013 10:16

I now have visions of the government insisting that all teachers are trained to say the word "sex" Miranda fashion. Hmm

And of course 11-13 year olds need to know about contraception. AND sexual health. It's an unsavoury fact, but there are children this age who are sexually active and need to know about these things. Pretending it doesn't happen isn't going to make it go away.

LittlePushka · 21/03/2013 22:36

It would be a really fascinating if specifically a consultation was targeted at secondary school children,...and their responses were compared with those of adults (effectivley perhaps a generation or so older).

I think that the real proximity of secondary school children to issues relating to sex and relationships gives their opinion and suggestions on these matters particular importance in assessing the impact/effectiveness of sex education in primary school.

plum100 · 21/03/2013 21:40

Puberty - happens to everyone
Penis/labia - correct terms
Sexual Health - as important as any physical/emotional health.

Why are they all being omitted? Ridiculous. Every one will experience these things and therefore should be educated about them- some of it from an early age - then they just become the facts of life - not some big massive cover up by adults.

apu123 · 21/03/2013 10:20

Well, logging in took forever but now I'm here, I have one simple thought really. That is that education on matters of sexuality should commence as early as possible and we should not be afraid to use appropriate language for body parts or activities. Sexuality is a fact of human existence and we should not treat it as a secret or something to be ashamed of. This only creates psychological problems, stress and an increased risk of entering into uninformed relationships and behaviours. It also serves to deny people their rights as humans and limits what has come to be called, their sexual citizenship. If people are squeamish or carry particular prejudices about sexuality, they should not be in the job of providing information to young people (or anyone else for that matter). Sexuality is just one more aspect of people's lives and should be treated as such.