To be glad that sex ed content in school is being reviewed?

[PatButchersEarring]

Well, am I? Here:

The article talks about the youngest children being exposed to mandatory sex education which is not true. Sex education is not mandatory in primary schools. Relationships education is mandatory. There seems to be so much scaremongering around this topic at the moment. No wonder parents are concerned. I am a primary school teacher and we teach relationship education in the sense of knowing what a healthy relationship is... at the youngest level about friendships and family not making vulvas out of playdough or teaching children how to choke each other safely as I read in another ridiculous article. It is great that education is constantly reviewed and evolving but it seems that there is an awful lot of panic being spread at the moment which creates an aura of mistrust between parents and teachers, a great many of whom do not have an "agenda" but are concerned for the wellbeing and safeguarding of children.

I agree it should be reviewed. Materials used should be fully shared, the lack of transparency is concerning.

I want my daughter getting a fact based education, not socialised into accepting her boundaries being eroded.

Some of the materials like the dice game etc are disgraceful

@Matleaveconfused

It would be nice to know how much is scaremongering.

I am convinced that schools are very well meaning, but I also think that some of the teachings (re gender identity etc) are inadvertently fuelling the current explosion in young teenagers questioning their own gender identity.

Certainly my daughter's secondary are fully signed up members to The Rainbow Flag Award, which to my knowledge is funded by Stonewall. When I asked to view materials, they were less than forthcoming.

Yes of course I agree that schools should be transparent with the materials that they are using as both you and @jeaux90 have said. This is what I would want when my daughter is secondary school age.

Schools are required by the government to give this information to parents (for example we did a presentation for parents about all of the resources we use and the content we cover - much less complex for Primary schools I am sure ), especially if you have asked I would think they should be providing you this information. Perhaps something to contact the Governers about if you feel you aren't getting answers and information.

What an odd framing.

I like anorexics, but I wouldn't want third parties with a pro-anorexic bias to be popping in to my kid's school to give dietary advice.

Oh dear.

Sigh.

@Tandora

It is attitudes like yours which has stifled debate and therefore polarised opinions.

Not everyone in the world has to agree, like and support gays/lesbian/trans/drag/porn etc .

If someone doesn't agree with men dressing up as women and going into a women's toilets are we all going to simultaneously explode!

Such a weird take.

Why do you think schools having evidence-based guidance on how and what to teach vulnerable teens is not a cause we should get behind?

Why do you think parents being able to see all materials and content used in the teaching of RHSE in their child's school both on request and in advance of their children receiving the lesson isn't a good thing?

What on earth has this go to do with not liking trans people?

Which bit of young people only being exposed to quality, unbiased, non political/religious RSE education, and their parents being included and facilitated to support them is not ok for you?

Parents are rightly concerned that some sex ed packages bought in by schools have very explicit content about sexual practices (that many parents have never heard of and that kids do not need to be tsught in schools).

As far as I can see, nobody had even mentioned trans people.

My DD’s secondary school are teaching two lessons this year - two whole lessons - on the the TQI+ bit of LGBTQI+. So an hour devoted to teaching queer theory and totally made up identity stuff, including a section on ‘dead naming’ and why it is ‘wrong’, and a section on the Stonewall riots which seems to rewrite history and relate it to trans rights today.

I don’t want my young teen daughter being taught this evidence-less, damaging nonsense, or being labelled ‘transphobic’ if she questions it.

Im happy for her to learn about different sexual orientations and about the history of LGB rights, but I don’t want a dubious political slant put on the teaching which erases gay and lesbian people and centres people with gender dysphoria.

All of this identity stuff doesn’t belong on the curriculum. I have complained and many other parents have, too.

RSE needs a massive rethink in this country. It’s been completely captured by Stonewall and other blatant lobbying organisations who don’t centre quality, balanced education and the safeguarding of children.

And to the poster who said ‘you don’t like trans people’ - grow up!

The OP very predictably did in her first reply.

Right: I’m the problem 🙄

OK so here's one problem; schools are required to share the content of PHSE with parents, but some outside providers have refused to do so on grounds of copyright. And that has been upheld by ICO.

From the report Page 24;
Parents report a further failure of transparency is occurring when schools refuse to share RSE resources with them, on the grounds that their third-party providers are withholding the materials in order to protect their intellectual property and commercial interests.
In a landmark case, concerning withheld RSE resources at a secondary academy school in London, the ICO has issued a Decision Notice explaining that the commercial interest of the independent RSE provider takes precedence over the public interest of parents to have full access to what their child was shown and taught in school
Likewise, the ICO decided that the privacy of the workshop facilitators presenting the RSE in the classroom is more important than the parents’ interest to know who came into contact with and taught their child, and so the name of visiting RSE practitioners can be withheld, which is an inevitable obstruction to safeguarding.
This decision also seems to lack a fundamental and necessary respect for the primacy of the parental-child relationship, setting a concerning precedent that state funded actors can teach children without parents knowing who they are. The case is progressing to an appeal at a First Tier Tribunal.

https://www.newsocialcovenant.co.uk/RSE%20BRIEFING%20FINAL%201631%20(IS)_small.pdf