Guest blog: We need to put Sex and Relationship Education on the National Curriculum - for all

[KateMumsnet]

Hello all

An amendment to the Children and Families Bill currently before parliament has been tabled, which would:

1. Add PSHE to National Curriculum;
2. Make age appropriate SRE a statutory component of this curriculum at all 4 Key Stages;
3. Specify that same-sex relationships, sexual violence, domestic violence and sexual consent be part of the curriculum on PSHE

The amendment is backed by the One Billion Rising campaign and other groups including End Violence Against Women, the EQUALS coalition and Women's Aid, and will be debated this coming Tuesday 11th June. Here Lisa Nandy, the Shadow Children's Minister who tabled the motion (along with Sharon Hodgson MP and Stella Creasy MP), explains why the proposals are vital to ensure both young men and women develop positive and equal relationships with each other, and calls on Mumsnetters to contact their MP asking for her/his support.

Tell us what you think here on the thread, and if you blog on this issue don't forget to leave your URL. If you like this post, do spread the word via the share buttons at the top of the page!




"We need to do more to protect children. Recent research by the Children's Commissioner found a shocking number of young people don't know what a good relationship looks like. This should be a wake up call that we are simply not doing enough to keep children safe.

Making clear, high-quality and age-appropriate sex and relationship education part of the National Curriculum is a vital and important step in equipping children with the ability to protect themselves from abuse now and in the future. This is not just about biology - but about helping young people to develop healthy attitudes towards sex and relationships. A recent report by the NSPCC found that a third of girls in relationships aged 13-17 have experienced physical or sexual violence in relationships, while one in 16 of this group reported experiencing rape. Not only are a third of young women experiencing violence and abuse in their relationships but a third of young boys are the perpetrators of this abuse. This is clearly a significant problem.

We need to break the cycle and education is key to preventing it from happening in the first place. With children and young people increasingly exposed to sexual content online and through social media, the need for information has never been greater. According to the Children?s Commissioner, boys as young as 11 are frequently exposed to pornographic images, and the NSPCC reports calls to Childline by teenage boys who are worried about what it is doing to them. There is strong evidence of a link between explicit images and a rise in sexual aggression and harassment of the opposite sex.

Not only does good quality sex and relationships education help protect children from becoming victims of abuse, it will help children develop healthy attitudes which will prevent them from becoming perpetrators of abuse themselves. It is vital that children can make healthy and informed decisions about their lives, and develop the confidence, skills and resilience to make good choices. This is too important to leave to chance.

That is why on Tuesday we will ask the Government to support an amendment to the Children and Families Bill to deliver age-appropriate sex and relationships education in all schools and give teachers the tools they need to deliver it.

Sexual abuse is not inevitable, and we have a duty to do all we can to prevent it. Children and young people have a right to expect that from their Government. Show your support for making Sex and Relationship Education part of the National Curriculum by contacting your MP to ask them to join me in voting for New Clause 20."

[BoneyBackJefferson]

Who is going to provide the stats for the teachers?
Who is going to tell the teachers what a "normal and healthy" relationship is?
Are we teaching about domestic abuse/violence or about violence against women?
What wlll be the curriculum?
What will be removed from the curriculum?

[amazingmumof6]

bumblebee what a tolerant and open minded opinion : move or home ed.

why should I move? or take my children out of school?
that sounds like discrimination and persecution based on my religious beliefs.

unacceptable

[deliakate]

Amazing mum, there are so many religious beliefs, so many interpretations of the bible even within Christianity (there are gay Christians for example). Living with your beliefs in a world populated by many, many others who do not share them is reliant on your faith and how you witness that to your children through the life you live, not down to denying them the chance to hear about the world as it actually exists today.

[OddSockMonster]

Well I think the amendment's a good idea and have e-mailed my MP to ask her to vote for it. Going by what I know of her, she probably will.

[TheFallenNinja]

"Here we are discussing the role of sex ed. Yes it should be taught. And yes it this way or the highway"

No we're not discussing the role of sex education, those in favour are slating those not in favour.

No it should not be taught beyond the biology.

Unless you are in a position of some authority I'm not aware of you are not in a position to state anything about highways and whether anybody should use them or not. Suggest you drop off your horse a moment.

I suspect you have something to do with the education system, just not really sure what.

[amazingmumof6]

you are saying that deciding WHEN my kids are ready to hear certain things=denying them to learn about the world.

that is accusation based on false assumptions

again, unacceptable

I'd rather people didn't worry about my children's well-being.
they are not the target "customers" of that campaigne, neither are they being abused, neglected, misinformed or deprived of anything.

( well my DS5 would certainly disagree as he was being denied chocolate apple juice today...on the basis that it doesn't exist)

I can only offer to agree to disagree.
I'm out.

[amazingmumof6]

just to clarify my last post was to delikate

[deliakate]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that your children would be the target of such a campaign, amazing. But I see in the same way as I see inoculation of children against diseases. If it saves a child's life in some way, either by helping them to recognise that something that is going on, or that may go on in the future is abusive - then it's worth a few children who are 'fine' and would never be in danger being involved along the way. What you tell them at home shapes them far more than school anyway.

Sorry, I wasn't sure of your exact position re timing of information giving. I thought you said you were opposed to them being told of the existence of any practice that you don't believe in and took that to be regardless of when the revelation would take place.

But I don't want to be in a personal argument about it. I am a Christian woman, and luckily have found lots of fellow Christians who feel the same way as me about this topic. So for me, putting it down to religion and belief is not a door closing statement.

[TheFallenNinja]

It's not about the content, it's about imposition.

Lets face it though, it won't go anywhere, like all these big ideas, nobody will be able to agree the content or tone of the subject matter and there will be all the groups opposed to one thing or another that will derail it anyway.

[SconeRhymesWithGone]

A narrower approach than contemplated by the proposed amendment, but one that is already the law in my US state:

"The health education curriculum for students in grades 7 through 12 shall include a teen dating violence and abuse component that includes, but is not limited to, the definition of dating violence and abuse, the warning signs of dating violence and abusive behavior, the characteristics of healthy relationships, measures to prevent and stop dating violence and abuse, and community resources available to victims of dating violence and abuse."

[midnightexpress]

Interesting discussion. We were discussing some changes coming into force here (Scotland) next year at our school Parent Council meeting last week. In previous years, P6 (=Y5, more or less) pupils have had a talk from the school nurse about relationships, sex etc. This is now to fall to teachers because of budget cuts. The HT says that pupils have indicated that they would prefer to discuss some of these issues with someone who is not their class teacher; in other words, that they find it easier to discuss some of these things with people they don't know well than with people they do. Of course this is not true of all children, but it's worth bearing in mind that with the best will in the world, there may be things that pubescent children find hard to discuss with those close to them.

[MmeLindor]

This isn't about YOU

This isn't about YOUR kids, and how you parent them.

It isn't a criticism of what you teach your kids.

It's really lovely that your kids are being brought up in a caring and tolerant environment but not all kids are that lucky.

They need to realise that it is not normal to see your mother being beaten, it's not normal to be told 'you are ugly.. you are so stupid', to be emotionally, physically and even sexually abused.

If schools don't talk about this with these kids, who will? Where will they find out that this is not normal, acceptable behaviour?

My kids don't need this talk, as it's something we discuss at home. Your kids don't need this talk cause you talk about it at home. That's brilliant for our kids.

This isn't for them. And it's selfish to deny the advice to children who really need it - for whom this could be life-changing - because of our cosy middle-class insistence on our rights.

[Tee2072]

Here. Here's my blog about this.

One thing to say and then I'm off to pick my son up from school:

I don't think this has anything to do with our rights and everything to do with our inability to say 'I know XYZ parent doesn't do this, let's get their kids into the classroom and teach this to them, but ABC parents do do this so their kids don't have to learn it from school.'

We're so busy not offending anyone we're failing to teach our children that all people do not need to be treated the same. That life isn't fair. That it is okay to point out that not all parents are good at what they do and need some help.

Feel free to rip me to shreds. I'll be back after I get my son.

[itsonlysubterfuge]

Maybe I didn't read it, but I didn't see anywhere where it stated what age they want to introduce these issues to children. Did I just miss it?

[inraolyn]

I'm all for some sort of education. I just got the biology when I was at school and it left me woefully, woefully unprepared.

I never got a sit down conversation with my mum about things; she handed me a bright pink book called "sex tips for girls" and I was so embarrassed I never opened it. I expect it was supposed to be about confidence in relationships or how to have safe sex, but I just saw "sex" on something my mum had given me and immediately shoved it down the side of my bed never to look at again.

And you know what? When I was 19 I met my XH. Six months or so later I was pregnant because I had no idea what safe sex was and despite being 7 years older than me and knowing damn well, he was all too happy to not use condoms and tell me things were fine because he was pulling out. I believed him. Just like I believed it was normal for him to slate my family until I stopped talking to them, for him to tell me what to think or critisise me if I didn't think like him. I thought it was only fair that I stopped being silly sometimes because it made him cross. I thought it was normal for him to shout at me when I did something wrong - all adults have arguments, don't they? And sex. Well, if you're engaged to someone then you really should have sex with them shouldn't you? Even if you're tired and you say no, if they keep on asking, it's not fair for you to deny him when he's horny.

And what about when he yells at the kids? Well, he didn't mean to, he was feeling stressed because they were being loud, and you just have to make sure they play more quietly next time and then he won't get so cross, will he. You just have to stop making mistakes and then he won't get cross with you and ignore you all evening. And anyway, every time he does something he apologises, so that makes it all better, doesn't it?

I worked up the courage to tell him I wanted out last November, and I finally moved out in April. I'm still recovering emotionally from the shock of realising that all was not well, that my family could see it, that people who knew me could see it, but that I didn't know because I had never known anything else. Because no one ever sat down with me and told me what abuse was. I had to learn it here, hiding the tabs when he walked past.

I'll teach my kids to be safe. My DS and my DD will know to respect partners and friends, to never act in a way that puts someone they should love in the position I was in. But I never got that education. And there are thousands of children out there who are still not getting that education.

I'll take my DC being bored for a few hours at school when they're hearing stuff they already know over the chance of them being abused themselves, thanks. I respect that not everyone sees it the same way as me, but if there is an opportunity for schools to stop abuse before it happens, why the hell is anyone against that? This is not the ideal world we want it to be, where everyone is raised properly. There are parents out there abusing their own kids. There are parents out there so busy being abused they don't know how to explain what normal is. The only way it has a hope in hell of ending is if everyone has the same access to education about how to be safe and what is wrong. My XH is convinced to this day that he did nothing wrong. That it was my fault for not communicating. That I "changed" or "lied". Because, funny story, apparently no one ever told him how to be in a healthy relationship either.

[lissieloo]

inraolyn has rather sadly, and brilliantly, demonstrated why this is such a good idea. Well done for leaving!

I also agree with MmeL's post at 10:45.

[Tee2072]

What about faith schools? Are they going to force the Catholic schools to teach things that are against their doctrine and their faith? Such as same sex relationships?

[midnightexpress]

Tee, I don't think you can run an effective state education system like that though, can you? If all parents are given the right to pick and choose what their children will and won't be taught, the whole system collapses. If you want to take advantage of a 'free at the point of use' education system, you will on occasion have to accept that some of it may not be the way you'd like it to be.

And I don't think there's anything 'lowest common denominator' about teaching children about what constitutes a healthy relationship. Quite the contrary.

[Tee2072]

But it is, midnight, if the reason you are doing it is to cover those whose parents don't teach them.

It's different than math or english or science because pretty much no parents teach that, do they? I mean, they might play games or sing the alphabet song or read to their children, but they aren't sitting them down to discuss algebra.

But parents are and should teaching about sex and relationships. And those that aren't should be identified and those kids can be taught about it at school.

I live in NI, as I say in my blog. I can't see this being adopted here anyway since 99% (made up stat, but it's around that) of our schools are faith based. Abortion is illegal here. CP is legal for same sex couples but I doubt marriage ever will be.

So how can you call it the "national" curriculum anyway? It's not. It's the English curriculum, isn't it?

[Offred]

Gosh I had a religious education on sex and relationships. Inadequate was not the word.

Part of the problem, and I'm totally at the naivety of some posters who seem to genuinely believe that their children will only be exposed to sex through them, is that from birth children are exposed to society's views of sex and relationships whether we as parents like it or not.

My experience of it was silence or some small amount of purely biological education at (religious) school, religion based "education" at home coupled with a total naivety about the level of sex and sexual pressure I was being exposed to outside the home which had a pretty toxic effect ranging from "my parents know nothing about this but if I speak to them about what I'm hearing/seeing/having done to me I will be judged".

You only need to visit a shop where all the "lads mags" are, be anywhere where a music channel or a soap or reality show might be on TV, there only needs to be one child in each playground with access to a mobile phone one time or an unhealthy attitufde towards sex for that phone or attitude to be spread round the whole school, especially when there is an attitude or feeling of censorship being projected by adults around which serves to both drive the behaviour underground and make it attractive.

When I was 10 at catholic primary one boy was bringing condoms in another was exposing himself and having the girls touch his willy. In high school (before mobiles) the porn and sexual bullying started... Everything is screaming that things are so much worse than this now... In high school the sex ed we had was pure biology but the teachers were all shagging each other and sometimes the students, messed up that sex couldnt be spoken about but could be done as long as it was secret...

I really think that proper sex ed of the type described in the op is not a substitute for home either, it is a compliment to what is spoken about at home and helpful. As a parent you cannot really believe that your attitude to sex is the only one your children will be exposed to, what is more important is which ones children are exposed to and whether they feel they can talk to you about those things they are being exposed to, the more adults speak about healthy relationships in settings outside the home the better and more confidently I think our children will handle their adolescence.

I would welcome this, I think we desperately need it.

[midnightexpress]

Tee, as I said in my original post, many children don't want to talk to their parents about certain issues, regardless of how open their parents think they are with their children - it's not just for the benefit of children in obviously dysfunctional families. Exposing children to these messages from as many different people as possible seems to me to be an extremely good thing - I genuinely don't understand why anyone would believe it was a bad thing to reinforce positive messages and hear different points of view than your own (or your parents').

I'm not sure what the situation is in NI, but in Scotland education is a devolved issue, so these proposals do not affect us.

[Tee2072]

There's lots of things children don't want to do, you make them do them anyway. That's part of being a parent, isn't it?

And I am also concerned as to what they'll be taught. Especially in faith schools who aren't going to teach what seems to be implied by the blog posted in the OP.

I don't believe I will be my son's only influence in regards to sex and relationships. I am just not sure the government should be one of those influences through the schools.

[MmeLindor]

I think you are overestimating the amount of parents who will talk openly and honestly to their children about sex and relationships, Tee.

And this isn't about not offending parents by asking them if they intend to speak to their children about these topics, but about protecting the kids.

I don't give a rats arse who I offend when I bring up this topic, because these people are adults who can make their own decisions. The kids can't.

We can't pick and choose what schools teach our kids. I have already mentioned that some of the teachings of my kids' school don't please me. I am willing to let that go and say to the kids, 'Well, I know that is what you were taught, but it isn't how I see it. This is what I think...'.

inraolyn
Thank you for sharing your story. Nothing could demonstrate what I mean better than that. I am very glad that you have escaped, and that you are building a better life for yourself and your DC.

[itsonlysubterfuge]

When I went to school my parents had to sign a permission slip for the teachers to discuss sexual education. You could allow the teacher to a) teach everything, b) teach everything except about contraception, or c) teach nothing. The school system did not break down and there were children's parents who denied permission. I don't see any problem with parents not wanting their children to learn about homosexuals or contraception, even though I personally do not have any objections. However, if they wanted to start teaching this at let's say 9 and younger, I think it's too young. However I tend to be old fashioned and behind the times in my views and I accept that.

[Tee2072]

I think you're underestimating it MmeL and the fact that your blog about it is most hit and most searched for proves my theory. People are looking for the information on their own. Whether it's parents or children searching, I don't know, but someone is looking.

And that's a good thing, of course. And it's easier than it's ever been to find out about this sort of thing thanks to the internet.

I don't disagree about protecting children, of course, who would? But I am not sure I trust the schools or the government to protect them. There are too many cases where no one protect some specific ones who were, apparently, under the care of the government in some capacity.

And if you don't care about offending parents, then what's wrong with asking if they are talking to their children about sex/relationships? With finding out if they are being 'good parents' in the way you (general you) think they should be?

And who is going to decide what a good parent is, anyway?