Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

100 organisations ask Labour to abandon Tory revised guidelines on RSHE

285 replies

IwantToRetire · 12/07/2024 00:56

The Conservative government launched a consultation in May on planned updates to guidance first issued in 2019, following a review of the reforms.

It proposed age limits on “sensitive” topics, ordered schools not to teach about “gender identity” and to share materials with parents.

Ministers were accused at the time of stirring up “culture war” issues in the run-up to the election.

The consultation closes today.

To coincide with its closure, more than 100 organisations including the ASCL and NAHT leaders’ unions, the PSHE Association, Sex Education Forum, Barnardo’s, Refuge and Everyone’s Invited have issued a joint statement calling for a “fresh start” to the review.

“We are calling on the next government to discard the draft guidance and begin this process in due course, focusing on the needs of children and young people and supporting teachers to deliver a high-quality, inclusive curriculum.”

Lucy Emmerson, CEO of the Sex Education Forum, said age restrictions would be a “backward step making children more vulnerable to abuse and harm”.

PSHE association chief executive Jonathan Baggaley, warned he had “deep concerns about the development process and shortcomings of the draft guidance, particularly on critical aspects of children’s safeguarding, wellbeing and inclusion”.

And Lynn Perry, chief executive of Barnardo’s, said introducing age limits to RSHE topics “risks children missing out on crucial teaching about abuse and exploitation”.

Continues at https://schoolsweek.co.uk/labour-faces-pressure-to-ditch-tory-rshe-reforms/

Labour faces pressure to ditch Tory RSHE reforms

Dozens of groups warn draft RSHE guidance 'falls short of what is required to help keep children safe'

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/labour-faces-pressure-to-ditch-tory-rshe-reforms

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
HagoftheNorth · 12/07/2024 09:16

highame · 12/07/2024 09:00

The 100 organisations, I assume, are charities and are biased. As we have seen over the years our charity sector has been politicised. If these calls are genuine and have safeguarding at their heart, all well and good. However, the Cass review, committed to by Labour, will have to be at the heart of reforms

Did Labour commit to the Cass review? My (hazy) recollection was that there was a sort of glancing recognition that it existed rather than any kind of promise to act on it?

I would love to be wrong, and have the references to support that if they slide later

highame · 12/07/2024 09:00

The 100 organisations, I assume, are charities and are biased. As we have seen over the years our charity sector has been politicised. If these calls are genuine and have safeguarding at their heart, all well and good. However, the Cass review, committed to by Labour, will have to be at the heart of reforms

JustGotToKeepOnKeepingOn · 12/07/2024 08:59

The RHSE at DDs school was handled very badly. Parents given no information about what would be covered and when asked it was always 'it'll be age appropriate'. But no indication of what that would be.

When asked how they would handle probing questions, it was the same answer again. ASD DD hated it all. She hated all the laughing and joking. The stupid questions from other children (only asked to put the teacher on the spot.) We have a very open relationship at home and she wasn't learning anything new, so I pulled her out of the classes as she was just getting too stressed about it.

I do also wonder how much the open discussions about gender issues has pushed many a vulnerable teenager down a path they would have been unlikely to go down. I'd be happy to see a lot of it gone. I think it's caused more problems than it solved.

ArabellaScott · 12/07/2024 08:22

Who needs age limits, eh?

I read through it last night. The age limits are sensible and there was provision for flexibility and responsiveness, so that if teachers had a particular issue come up they had the ability to discuss it.

MsGoodenough · 12/07/2024 07:49

I doubt the Labour govt needs any encouragement to scrap it.

Imnobody4 · 12/07/2024 07:48

Really we haven't even had the results and they want them cancelled?

It would be an insult to democracy. Who's playing culture war now.

UpThePankhurst · 12/07/2024 07:46

Captured organisations.

Which is the problem.

Those organisations' income and support relies on emphatically not prioritising the safeguarding and best interests of children, but furthering their own. So it really wouldn't matter if there were 5000 of them.

Pretty please other government, remove the boundaries to us getting into schools, enforcing our politics and agenda, trotting children to mutilation, drugs and lifetime damage, (particularly the ones with Autism and who are gay), and actively discriminating against and silencing diversity of belief/enforcing compelled belief.

Wonder if the Labour govt are grown ups about this, or just going to be lobby puppets without conscience and guts the way the unions used to run Labour in the 70s?

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 12/07/2024 07:46

Hopefully all the organisations that ignored calls for a public inquiry are taking a long hard look at themselves now. Well done, bravo.

FinalCeleryScheme · 12/07/2024 07:30

On the basis that the ideology of ‘gender identity ’ begins and ends with the proposition that one sex can change to the other through willpower and a trip to Primark, children should be taught that it’s complete nonsense. Because it is.

eatfigs · 12/07/2024 07:20

Was there evidence for each of the age limits? Some of them seemed quite arbitrary.

I don't agree that the ideology of "gender identity" shouldn't be taught about. If kids don't get the information from school they'll get it elsewhere. Instead it should be explained, very clearly, that it's a highly contested belief, and why.