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."

People are searching for info - but it is hit and miss to what they find. I read that far-right groups put a lot of money into SEO so that when someone searches for info about abortion, their sites come up first on google. Not sure if it happens here - that was in US.

I'd be willing to ask parents, but would all schools? And should they be able to opt out?

The whole point of having a national curriculum is that kids should (in theory) get a similar education all over the country. When I lived in Germany, there was different curriculum in each of the states, and it made it very difficult for kids to move to a school in another state. Which makes the parents even less flexible to move areas, if they are looking for work.

But is it a national curriculum? Are they going to force faith schools to teach what is against their beliefs? And should they?

To answer my own question: no, it's not. Not if Scotland is automatically excluded, as I assume NI will be.

So it doesn't even affect me.

I think fundamentally if their beliefs are offensive and discriminatory, as certain beliefs held by various fundamentalists about women and homosexuals are, then yes I think they should be required to teach against their beliefs actually if they are expecting to be a state educator and have funding from the government for providing education. I don't think religious belief should relieve anyone of their social duties towards other people and I don't think state schools should be relieved of their duty to teach in the public interest so that they can promote the church's private agenda as though it is a state sanctioned view.

that is as twisted a logic as it can possible get offred

what our children learn from us will prepare them to be responsible and kind and generous and helpful and caring people. to benefit them and society.
precisely because of our beliefs.

and for the last time, it is not the content but the proposed execution of it that I'm against.

Which bit?

I mean obviously all parents hope that their influence in their children's lives will be a positive one. What I'm talking about is the other influences in your ch

Oops.

The other influences in your child's life and how you cannot hope to be the only influence.

As far as I can see, in the interest of something being mandatory as opposed to nothing, it seems a no-brainer (to me at least) that children should be taught from, say, nine or ten (before secondary school at least, so maybe year six) how to spot abuse, and how to show respect for a partner or friend. As a bare minimum. It doesn't have to be about rape or violence even, just a few sessions on healthy friendships and how a marriage/civil partnership/relationship of a romantic nature between two adults is much the same, and should follow the same patterns of behaviour.

It's not about sitting very young children down and talking about rape or about safe sex. It's about setting the foundations for that education later; before they learn alternate behaviour. At nine or ten, children are starting to gain a broader awareness of the world. At eight, I had no idea what it really meant that my parents were separating. At ten, I understood that the man who stalked my mother was a Bad Person and can remember getting really cross and wanting the police to arrest him, even though my mother kept up an "everything is fine" act that she didn't let down until I was in my teens. (And it's why the notion of a cycle of abuse worries me so. I can clearly see the pattern of daughters whose mothers have been abuse going on to be abused themselves.)

My mother thought she was equipping me for the world with that book, which probably did have a lot of useful stuff in it. But she didn't know how to sit down and make sure I understood what it was all about. She was restrictive about me going out with friends, so I was 18 before I ever got so much as tipsy. (And while I don't advocate underage drinking, being the last one to experiment with alcohol by a number of years means that you're going in totally inexperienced while everyone else knows their limits, which is not a safe position at all.)

I don't think faith schools should be absolved from their responsibility to properly equip the children in their care with the knowledge they need to keep themselves safe. Should parents teach it at home? Of course they should. But that doesn't mean that they all can, and it certainly doesn't mean that they will.

Saying that it's "not like Maths or English" doesn't really wash for me. You would struggle in life without being able to read well, or write properly, or without being able to do numeracy work. Would you suffer from not knowing science? Well, that's debatable. Either way, while you would struggle a bit to get a job, people can and do get by in life quite well with only the most rudimentary education some of those areas. It's not good, but they can. Not knowing how to spot abuse could kill you, quite literally. People die in abusive relationships. People are beaten and cowed, and children grow up to continue that cycle down another generation. We need intervention to stop it continuing. You can learn to read at any age. It's harder to change a lifetime's learned behaviours.

To those advocating this.

You do realise that the National Curriculum only applies to state schools?

Academies, independents, private, free, and faith schools do not have to teach the national curriculum.

A maintained faith school will have to teach the NC, but not all faith schools are state funded.

You have totally hit the nail on the head Fliss. It's about every child/young person having a nationally agreed, standardised curriculum with regards relationships, consent, sex, pornography, abuse etc so everyone is on an equal footing. If parents want to clarify or supplement their education at home (like with anything else on the National
Curriculum) then that is their right to do so, but at least the child/young person has all of the same information as their peers.

And we are all honestly comfortable with this being handled by the state, specifically Michael Gove currently.

As I have said, I have no issue with the content, none whatsoever, but I believe that the government of the day (whoever they are) will make such a dogs breakfast of it that all usefulness will be lost and rather than it be simple subject matter it will be come political dogma

The state does not allow gay marriage (for now), some mainstream
faiths are openly an aggressively homophobic, how will that be reconciled, this wants to talk about equality but every now and again there is huge debate on the lack of it, there are many ideals that the current statute runs contrary to.

I've been on MN a while now and one thing I can absolutely say is that on various topics we are wanting to give the state control on are the ones that cause the biggest disagreement on this very forum and bring out the most hostility, not unlike this thread.

Of course, in principle, education is the right way to inform, but the message will be lost.

I think you are missing the point that teachers and schools have to handle these issues anyway because for 6-7 hours a day our children and teachers are there in school conducting relationships... Some guidance and support with that would be helpful wouldn't it? Currently we have a ridiculous atmosphere of silence surrounding the discussion of what is actually going on in schools everywhere already - students are conducting relationships with each other, 1 in 3 of them containing abuse, teachers are conducting relationships with each other and students are gossiping about that possibility even when it isn't going on, sometimes students and teachers are conducting relationships, particularly in 6th form. It is happening, sex ed wont miraculously introduce the concept of sex and relationships into schools, it will help open lines of communication and provide a standard and support teachers and pupils if it is done right.

Abuse thrives in the current climate of titilation and prudishness.

This isn't gove's idea. I doubt gove will be in favour of it.

Like many things the government does - great idea - appallingly executed.
On the surface this issue seems so simple and just good sense, but as we see from experience, once agreed to, this will become a Trojan horse that opens the door to groups of people with questionable motives that had you prior known about it, you would never have agreed to.
Take sex education for example, seems a great idea, to ask your teacher to take responsibility for a sensitive job that really, as a parent, comes with the territory. Beware - you are allowing someone to come between you and your child.
I agree not all parents want to talk about this tough subject but for those of us confident to do it, I don't see why my requirements cant be accommodated - we are a free democracy - or are others afraid of alternative opinions? I don't want anyone with a different agenda talking to my child without my knowledge and agreement.
I speak from experience, I went to my school and asked for information about PHSE / Sex ed. curriculum for Year 6. The school have misled me and put material in front of my child that was completely inappropriate.
Good Sex ed? In practice, it is far a few between
If the government wants to RECOMMEND, then that is one thing but with all these conversations about same sex marriage and homosexuality I certainly don't want the government to slide this in hidden in wrappings of awareness of domestic violence awareness.
Recommend - yes compel - no thank you

SuffolkNWhat

the point is that a large amount of children will not be taught this as many types of school do not have to follow the national curriculum.

Does anyone know how this panned out today?

This is absolutely insane. You acknowledge that 'There is strong evidence of a link between explicit images and a rise in sexual aggression and harassment of the opposite sex.' and yet you are proposing a programme that will make very sure that children are exposed to explicit ideas/images from a very young age - even if their parents have taken great pains to protect them from inappropriate images. Seems to me you will end up increasing the damage.

Surely it would be better to join the campaigns to remove pornography from sight in newsagents and clean up the sexual imagery on television, billboards, online and in video games, so that children aren't exposed to this everywhere they turn in the first place.

Is it possible to only give sex education to young people when they are individually ready for it? Otherwise it seems to me that the state will be just another violator.

I agree with amazingmumof6 - 'I prefer to be in charge of what my children learn regarding those topics above.'
I don't think that even more sex education will reduce teenage pregnancies. I was born in the Czech Republic and although sex education is not taught until the age of 13, teenage pregnancies are still very rare.

I certainly would agree to the notion of sex ed,positive r/ships,being good friends and generally being a nice,polite,accepting member of society being taught in all schools.BUT I would like to know what is being taught so that I am aware of what my child has been told,I wouldnt want to confuse her over something that is my point of view or particular thinking. My daughter is in year 1 (6 years old) and came out of school yesterday and told me she had a boyfriend and how fit he was.Gosh I was shocked,Even more so when I realised it was a young man out of a popular pop group.I am not even aware she knew the group or the music. Geared towards respective ages I dont think anyone is too young to be given the guidance/information in a responsible manner.

same in Hungary neverland

good old communism?

and thank also, I'm chuffed you quoted me!

I agree with the blog and with the principle of making sex ed compulsory and to cover relationships and consent. I think the Tories and Lib Dems voted against the amendment yesterday :(

did they?

fantastic!

ugh. this thread makes me ...ugh

If you want total control over your childrens education, home school.

If you want them to enjoy a decent school for free, then send them to a state school where they should be taught a variety of topics including a broad based up to date sex education. If you send your children to a free state run school you simply cannot be expected to like/agree with every method/topic and how it is taught. the topics are for the greater good and will not be perfectly tailored to your liking...that is why good parents step in and supplement learning.