DS’s school to teach abstinence education

[Childsschool128]

DS goes to a normal state school but they have sent home a letter saying that their sex ed they will be teaching from next term will include:
-the benefits of having one lifelong monogamous partnership
-the risks of contraceptives
-the dangers of unprotected sex
-the benefits of not having sex in teenage years
-the health risks of sexual promiscuity.
DS is 15 (year 10) and there has never been any indication they were anything other than mainstream in the past. Is this really what is taught in UK schools nowadays DS is my eldest so I have never had to deal with anything like this before.

Because we were full of hormones and raring to go I expect. I won't say parts of my life wouldn't have been better if I had adhered to their advice but I was 15 then and thought I knew it all. I don't suppose teenagers now are very different and 'telling' them not to have sex is unlikely to work.

Abstinence is not holding off a bit. I'm all for delaying sex until one is ready and young people should not feel pressurised BUT this is not what the OP says is being taught in her DS's school. It is not the right of a school to push an agenda they have to follow the statutory guidance not just someone's whim. The new RSE curriculum was widely consulted upon for years and no Head Teacher or whoever can just ignore it. This is an extremely important principle otherwise we could have all sorts of crackpot ideas being pushed.

I've told my DC about the risks of contraception.
I didnt want my DD to think that taking the pill is "enough". It's not just about pregnancy, it needs to be about STDs as well.
There is the morning after pill for unwanted pregnancy, HIV would be a much bigger issue.

Re abstinence, well anything that teaches kids that they dont have to have sex until they are ready, has to be a good thing. But abstinence until when? It's one thing advising them to wait until they are ready and quite another you say they have yo be married or engaged.

@VestaTilley

Er, what?

I’d be writing to Ofsted and the Department of a Education - has the school been taken over by a mad evangelical religious Academy chain?

Tell the school you don’t agree with this message and that you won’t allow DS to attend.

What about the teaching do you object to?

Can any teachers tell me how sex Ed is normally taught these days?

@TechnoDino

Bloody hell, that is most definitely what is taught in our school! The risks of contraceptives? Wtf? I would be asking for a copy of the material used and checking it carefully for its source, hopefully not based on American purity teaching?

@TechnoDino so what is taught at your school do you really not cover the risks of contraceptives?

@Wearywithteens

“Abstinence is not holding off a bit.”

Abstinence is exactly holding off. If you’re a conservative Christian or Catholic this might be until your wedding night. But in of itself it’s not harmful to tell all teenagers to wait until it feels right for them.

Is it wrong for sec Ed to be delivered from a faith perspective?

@Wearywithteens

OTNC - I’m a Christian and I’d prefer ‘a wait until you’re ready approach’ - strangely I grew up with the Jackie magazine and that’s what their advice was - it worked for me! However under the new DfE guidelines it’s not unlawful for faith schools to give their own perspective.

Abstention is an old fashioned idea but porn attitudes and expectations filtering down to pressure young women does concern me. I think we have a moral duty to teach girls and boys that one option for contraception is the word no, and that they can make their own choices when it feels right (that doesn’t have to mean some 19th century idea of it being on their ‘wedding night’).

I find this interesting surely as the Bible is clear that sex before marriage is sinful we would want sex Ed to teach that sex should be only in the context of a marriage?

Alittleandalot: I find this interesting surely as the Bible is clear that sex before marriage is sinful we would want sex Ed to teach that sex should be only in the context of a marriage?
.......
Where exactly in the Bible does it precisely say that?

I find this interesting surely as the Bible is clear that sex before marriage is sinful we would want sex Ed to teach that sex should be only in the context of a marriage?

The Bible is (respectfully) not "clear" on very much in that context. And anyway, even if you're specifically discussing the curriculum of religious schools, I don't think abstinence as the sole method of sex education is beneficial. Both for the health risks, but also I don't think indoctrination with any one specific religion (and the subsequent guilt of potential choices) is especially healthy for young people who are struggling with the decision to have or not have sex.

Sorry, that was a bit of a word-vomit but hope it made sense.

Virginity Rocks has been a trend with teens for at least the last 3 years. They get it a lot more than adults give them credit for!

Obviously the last year has thrown many more issues into the mix.

Hebrews 13:4 says “ let the marriage bed be undefiled” (not full verse).

Back to the main point op I think it would be irresponsible for a school not to heavily focus on those things

@Theposter98

Hebrews 13:4 says “ let the marriage bed be undefiled” (not full verse).

What that means is don't be unfaithful. It doesn't say no sex without a legal piece of paper.

As usual these days the biggest morons shouting the loudest get their way. The endless studies showing this is a disastrous method dont get a look in, and the trans obsessed want to direct a bit of spite at the sex education in schools they blame.

Where are people getting the 'its about waiting until you're ready' nonsense from? all sex education teaches that. Abstinence means waiting until marraige. Does abstinence with drinking mean 'waiting until you feel ready'?

To be honest this sounds excellent rather than complaining you should be complementing his teachers for resisting societal pressure to be “cool” and actually teaching the facts

Research in the United States has found that abstinence-only education is related to increases in teen pregnancy and teen birth rates. Comprehensive sexual education on the other hand leads to a reduction in teenage birthrates.

Wikipedia link.

A 90 year old woman I know told me that in her youth it was only the "nice girls" who got pregnant. The naughty girls took great care not to. The nice girls didn't plan ahead or acknowledge intercourse was on the cards - telling people you just got carried away was far more acceptable than carefully going out and obtaining a diaphragm, spermicide and/or a condom. Only bad girls did that.

I became sexually active in my mid teens - and I have no regrets. So did my adult sons and my DSD. I talked to them very openly before that age. My DSD is happily married and my sons are respectful, gentle young men.

I'd ask about "the risks of contraceptives" as I suspect they will be hoping to frighten sinners with that.

And do they balance "the benefits of having one lifelong monogamous partnership" with it being ok to leave if you are being abused?

These are all subjects worth discussing in class, but not if part of a cult's propaganda message.

Yeah it could mean that, but it doesnt.

'Abstinence-only sex education is a form of sex education that teaches not having sex outside of marriage. It often excludes other types of sexual and reproductive health education, such as birth control and safe sex.'

www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/abstinence-education-programs-definition-funding-and-impact-on-teen-sexual-behavior/#:~:text=Abstinence%2DOnly%20Education%20%E2%80%93%20Also%20called,prevent%20unintended%20pregnancy%20and%20STIs.