to object to the idea of "keeping children innocent."

[cailindana]

I have seen on a few threads here and in rl the idea that by not telling children about sex, rape, HIV etc that you are keeping them "innocent."

What is the opposite of innocent?
Was I the opposite of innocent because I knew about rape when I was 6, because I was raped?

IMO the notion of keeping children innocent by keeping them in the dark about sex is a paedophile's dream. How could I tell anyone about what happened to me when I had no words to explain it?

It's not innocence, it's ignorance. There is absolutely nothing wrong or dirty or shameful about sex and there is no reason children shouldn't know about it. They'll know plenty about it from their peers anyway, much of it incorrect. Also, unfortunately, they need to know (IN AN AGE APPROPRIATE WAY - I shout this before I'm asked whether children should watch porn) about the darker side of sex and the ways in which people might hurt them.

A natural normal curiosity about their own bodies and the way they work and will change should not be met with embarrassment and lies, as that will only lead children to seek their information elsewhere, possibly from dangerous sources.

AIBU?

cailindana and GratefulHead I'm so sorry about what happened to you. (for what it's worth)

NeverFinish, I've always been open with my ds as well and just worked on the assumption that if he's old enough to ask, he'd old enough to get a decent answer - always age appropriate though. He started asking when he was just turned four so he's known about the basics since then. He also knows about HIV (having come home from school saying that other kids were telling each other they had AIDS - this was when he was around 7). I have also experienced hostility from other parents when we've discussed what we're all telling our children - on at least two occasions that I can remember I've had friends get all huffy and say 'Well, I hope he doesn't mention it to mine because I don't think they're old enough to know yet' or words along those lines - not really sure what I'm supposed to do about that, tbh.

Lower the age of consent to 14?!? Please tell me you're joking greengrow...

I can see where greengrow is coming from. Why should a 16 year old be prosecuted for sleeping with a 15 year old?

Whilst I don't agree with lowering the age of consent I don't agree with prosecuting a teenager for sleeping with a similarly aged teenager

I can see the logic too - young boys shouldn't be criminalised just for being sexually active with a girl their own age. Isn't there already some kind of leeway though, if both are under 16? I could be wrong, but I think there are prosecution guidelines or something. I might be misremembering though. I would favour there being no prosecution if there was two years or less difference between them and the younger party was at least 14.

Iwasinamandbunit that's awful I really hope you're in a much better place now

Lowering the age would lead to all sorts of complications - a much older wo/man having sex with a 14 year old and getting away with it because it's now legal. Pedophiles have been campaigning to have the age of concent lowered for years, a 14 year old is still considered a child and a pedophile would happily take advantage of this.

But yes, if it's two teenagers sleeping together that are both in consent then I think a stern word and ensuring that safe sex is being practiced is much better than being prosecuted (and before anyone jumps down my throat about being ok with teenagers sleeping together but not adults and teenagers, please just consider how right you would really find it if you were to hear about a 40 yo wo/man sleeping with a 14 yo)

I think it can also swing the other way, where there is too much information that a young child can take on board. It can get complicated as dd has ASD her school sometimes have to do personal care when she soils herself and so do I. Where do we stand when we say your private areas are for yourself, and nobody should touch them! I need to be in contact with them so i can clean her and so do her carers. Its complicated. If the child is young then they might need help with cleaning themselves too.

I have a flannel which I use for her but I try and get her to do it herself, but if she is not doing it properly i have to intervene.

The idea of PANTS is that you tell the child they belong to themselves but if a doctor of carer needs to go near them they will fully explain what they are doing and why they're doing it and it will be done with their agreement and their parent will know about it

You have to go with what the child can understand Aero. There's no point in teaching them something they just can't comprehend. Depending on your DD's language you could perhaps get across the difference between washing and touching and explain about her being asked to touch others, which is often an aspect of abuse.

Secrets are the central thing I think. A child should feel that every interaction they have with someone is known about by their parents and that they can talk about whatever happens. The idea of secrets should be an absolute no-no.

I agree with Greengrow on the age of consent.

For those who've said the NSPCC PANTS is too old for their child, my friend was telling me today about the Precious Pants rule that she's taught her little one, which is that no-one's allowed to touch your pants except Mummy, Daddy or other specified people (the people who look after her and would take her to the loo, eg Nan and the childminder), and if anyone else does, it's ok to hit them, scream and run away. That sounds sensible to me, and I'll bear it in mind for when my DD is old enough to learn it.

Aeroflot - and others with ASD children (I have one too), this book was linked on my FB page yesterday, apparently there are going to be similar ones for girls coming out, might be worth a look.

Tom's books

Mine never asked how babies are made, I simply explained it to them when they started reception year. I felt it was important to get the facts in before they heard playground nonsense. They're 7 & 6 now and I've added little bits of info over the years.

7yo DS still believes in the tooth fairy and father xmas so I've obviously not corrupted him .

Waiting for them to ask seems odd. There's thousands of things I've taught the children without them asking. I dread to think what vital info might get missed if I forgot to tell them.

Yes, funnily enough mine have never asked how to get dressed, how to make their bed, how to do the washing up, but I haven't forgotten to tell them those either.

No but your children have seen you washing up, getting dressed and making their bed and also had you help them get dressed so haven't needed to ask

They have seen me in the nude plenty of times and never asked about why my body is different to DH's though.

Or different to theirs for that matter.

What I mean is, they don't need to wash up while they live at home because DH and I can do it. But they will need to do it at some point so I teach them. Same with sex, they won't be doing it for a while yet, but they need to know for when the time comes.

Thanks who knows I will get it for when dd is a bit older and mature.

I wouldn't class sex as vital information for a 7 year old to be honest.

Teaching them good hygiene protect children's health. Teaching them to read allows them to access the world through the written word. Teaching them about sex in a natural way without any shameful associations lays the foundation for healthy intimate relationships as adults as well as offering some protection against inappropriate sexual behaviour.

Of course it's vital.

Exactly, I feel safer knowing they know what is right and wrong. It's biology. I've told them how their lungs work, what their blood is for etc. The basics of the facts of life are biology too. Nothing shameful about that IMO.

I forgot the YANBU earlier. So

Sorry my last post probably came across quite scary now that I read it back. It wasn't intended.

There seem to be a lot of assumptions being made here, particularly about the parents who have decided to wait until our children show a curiosity about sex, that they are some how in danger or that sex will have shameful associations and I believe these are very wrong.

Just because my DS doesn't know the ins and outs of sex doesn't mean he isn't aware of his body and what is appropriate/inappropriate. Sex and sexual abuse are completely different subjects.

As for it being shameful, I have no idea where that idea has come from tbh. I don't find sex shameful in any way I just don't feel my son is mature enough yet to properly get his head round it.

When the time comes I will be very open about it all but I would rather wait until he is ready and will be able to process the information with a better understanding, rather than try my best and hope he gets it.