Sex Education in Primary Schools - I've been to the meetings and I still feel uncomfortable, is it just me?

[Rhubarb]

I sat through a meeting last night about the kind of sex education that will be provided to our children, starting from Reception up to Year 6.

I agreed with everything the guy from the Education Dept said, about openess and focusing more on relationships and emotions etc. Then they showed up clips of the video they'll be using to teach the kids. So far so good.

In the section aimed at 5-7 year olds it showed a cartoony illustration of a girl's bits and went through the names - this leads to the vagina, this is a clitoris. Then it said "the clitoris is a small bump at the front, it can sometimes get hard and this can feel nice" - we weren't shown but apparently the video says the same thing for the boys. An audible gasp and murmurs rose up from us, the parents.

For the age bracket 7-9 they add the words "if you touch it, it can feel nice".

Myself and some other parents felt uncomfortable with this and we had a discussion with him at the end. Everything he said seemed to make sense, about not making sex seem dirty, it's natural, it feels nice etc. Not being ashamed of their body parts, and focusing on the fact that girls can feel nice as well as boys.

So why do I still feel uncomfortable with this bit? I don't think I would have an issue with that aimed at older children, say in Year 6. But for this age, I have this niggly feeling that just isn't right.

So often as parents we can only rely on our instincts and we are told to follow them as much as possible. Yet when it comes to sex ed we are told that our instincts are just our hangups about sex and to ignore our feelings and trust what they are saying.

So I wondered what you lot had to say about it all?

My comment about the over-18 rated film wasn't related to the word clitoris but in response to solidgoldbrass seemingly saying that children couldn't be harmed by age-inappropriate stuff just because they might find it "embarrassing/scary/yucky".

Fairymum, interesting that the sites seem to be looking to parents as the main source of information for their children. And the key seems to be answering children's questions rather than presenting them with information.

After all the controversies over teaching children to read over the last 4 decades I'd be amazed if there was any sort of immediate consensus on the teaching of sex ed.

Of course parents should be the main source of information. I don't think they are planning weekly lessons are they? I think its good for the children with parents who think their children don't masturbate (sorry, I mean "fiddle") that they might get some of their questions answered at school. I still don't really understand what parents worry about? What sort of harm can be done by this exactly?

i don't think it's by any means a given that all children masturbate/fiddle. I never did, for one thing. I don't think my children do either (not that I woukld have any problem with that).

I think you're also assuming that I wouldn't answer my children's questions - I would. And that , to me, is exactly the point. They have never asked any questions along those lines - so why should "the state" deem it appropriate to answer them?

I absolutely agree with the poster who said it sounds worryingly like the sort of thing a paedophile groomer might say.

In particular your first link, FairyMum, has no validity at all.

And your point about education not being just maths and English is rot. Of course children learn other things at school, but what a few of us are trying to say is that sex education is a difficult area and for schools to blunder into it because of some government initiative that will be invalidated tomorrow is worrying, to say the least.

Children have been taught to read using various methods over the last few decades. Some have proved to have been disastrous. I don't want my dcs being subjected to an idea that may have people throwing up their hands in horror in ten years' time.

I'd like to see some evidence that "if you tell them too much, too soon, it can lead to problems, fear and confusion". Why should there be fear, and what sort of problems do you envisage?

I think that you may be taking things out of context because you were only shown clips - it sounds as if it would have been much more helpful to have shown all the parents the whole programme, rather than possibly the bits which might cause upset on their own. btw I'm not surprised the school only have the one copy, as for teaching purposes that is all they would need, and there would be resource implications in having many copies.

Why did the audience gasp when they were told that touching the clitoris might be nice I wonder. It is after all true. Some girls touch earlier than others (I didn't at all until I was an adult, it had nothing to do with my maturity, but again I was raised to think that sex was about lying back and thinking of England - very healthy, not). I think it is highly unlikely that if you considered the girls (or boys for that matter) who touched vs those that didn't there would be any significant differences in "innocence" or indeed any other behaviours.

I would suspect that most of the children watching the film will pay much less attention to it than we as parents would in any case. They will take in the bits they understand, and quickly forget the rest (which is why it is a continuous programme, not a one off). Certainly that has been my experience in teaching my two, as indeed with most of the things we talk about together.

Regarding our countries iffy attitudes to sex, I think there are much more significant things to worry about (like the horrible fashions, emphasis on boyfriend/girlfriend stuff far to young etc). The Scandinavian countries have extensive sex education, and it doesn't seem to cause their children any lasting harm (later age of first sexual encounter is probably good) although of course there is more to it than that.

Oh and regarding the 18-rated film, that is a rather pointless analogy. Of course you shouldn't show an adult film to a child, but this film has specifically been made (god forbid by people with specialist expertise in this area, how appalling) for young children. 18 films on the other hand are specifically made for adults.

Fairymum - it is down to the moral context that it is being delivered in. It won't be a dry delivery of facts as the children will ask questions. And as a parent I don't have control over how those are answered.

How would you feel if your child was told by the teacher that they shouldn't touch themselves? And how would you know how your child's teacher would answer that question?

"I don't want my dcs being subjected to an idea that may have people throwing up their hands in horror in ten years' time."

Yes, because Britain is a pioneering country when it comes to sex ed. LOL

nothing you can say can sway me to change my mind fairymum. you're just grating on me now with sarcastic comments like that.

I don't think I will change you mind. I am contributing to a debate. Some posts are quite funny though. Why would people throw their hands up in horror? What exactly could be the consequences? Sorry, but it is slightly amusing.

Isn't that why they use the video? Otherwise I agree, it's like religion, I'm happy for the facts but not the beliefs. Actually that's why in a lot of ways I really do not want sex ed to be in a "moral" context. It should be part of a discussion about relationships, not morals.

As to whether at some point we will find that we've been doing it all wrong? Well of course that is a risk, but then that is a general risk with bringing up children, sending them to school etc. All we can do is look at the body of research, and work out strategies from there. If of course you think that everyone involved in research or teaching in this area are complete idiots (or po-faced humourless public sector under-educated jumped-up meeting-loving parasites) and that those providing advice have no validity, then really I think you should home ed, as clearly you know far more than anyone else.

Not every school is adopting this approach nooka. Not all heads agree. Should they resign every time they disagree with yet another government initiative?

I think Heads should follow research, yes. Of course! But I work in health, so it seems pretty obvious to me that practice should be continuously reviewed, and that keeping abreast with new research is part of being a professional. With new initiatives often there is no choice, and sometimes (well quite often) they are introduced without being sufficiently evaluated. I would expect a good Head to consider initiatives (if optional) in the light of the research base, bearing in mind the demographics of the children in the school, and introduce them if they are appropriate (to local circumstances), taking advice from those with more expertise in the field.

Given there seems to be a constant trend that Scandanavian children enter formal education later than the UK I would be surprised if the Scandanavian states managed to ensure that all 5yo girls were aware of the location and purpose of their clitoris. Am also struggling to know whether that information is of any use to 5yo boys, but that is another discussion entirely.

Nooka, wonderful caveats. Would you agree that it is possible for a good head to have considered the research, listended to experts and parents, weighed their options and concluded that they didn't feel appropriate to introduce this teaching in KS1?

What I meant, Juule (WRT to kids not being harmed by stuff they find yucky) is stuff that is generally deemed age-appropriate but which some parents think their little darlings are too 'pure' to experience. I wonder if these parents also disapprove of their DC being taught the same amount of history/biology as their classmates given that biology and history contain concepts and facts which may distress some children. It is of course true that degrees of maturity vary within a class, but it's also true that kids have to learn to deal with stuff that is distressing (death, for instance. You might whine and bleat if the school was going to teach them about funerals but that wouldn't stop at least one kid in a class of 5 year olds experiencing a bereavement of some description).
What irritates me is this idea that sex (and FFS knowing the names for parts of your own body and how they work) is somehow toxic and corrupting and that keeping children ignorant or feeding them bullshit about imaginary beings is good for them.

I would have been happy for any of my children to be given this information. There is nothing wrong in understanding your body and what is pleasurable

Knowing you have a clitoris isn't going to sexualise children. No more than knowing you have a vagina, anus or elbow. Knowing that you have clitoris and it's nice to play with also isn't going to make your children run off and have a rub (if they don't already) Understanding and knowing your body will just give you understanding and knowledge

Regarding sexual feelings in children, I know of 3 pre schoolers that would play and have an end. One would say I haven't finished yet. They had a form of orgasm. They didn't see or know it as sexual, it was just a nice thing to do

People are shocked that I gave my 13 year old son a pack of condoms and that he should use them to masturbate. It saved on the washing (towels/tissues) and helped teach him to put the condom on and not be embarrassed by them. Other parents think I am mad. Have also discussed masturbation with my daughters.

Reading this, I get the feeling that people in this country, still have an issue with masturbation, especially for girls. If more youngsters got self pleasure, maybe they wouldn't be so quick to get it from the opposite sex as teenagers

well i think we should all respect each others opinions on this.

as i said earlier year 5 is early enough ime and i have a 15 year old (who would quite frankly laugh if i gave him condoms so i wouldn't have to wash the bed linen)

LadyMuch, this might be of interest to you about Swedish schools then:

www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070318/26sex.htm

Solidgoldbrass - my ds passed out during the y6 'talk'. Not because he didn't know about what was being told to him and his class but out of embarrassment of being told it in front of his classmates. He was able to discuss these things with me and his dad and quite okay with other people in a small group.
In y7 he was excused the lesson as he still couldn't cope with something he felt was personal being openly discussed and as he'd been ridiculed for fainting by his peers, he didn't want to risk the same again.
He is still quite a private person.

And yes some children will experience certain things. In the case of a death, should we ensure that all children experience the bereft feeling that a child who has lost someone close feels? I'm not sure how that ties in with this discussion.
I kept some of my children from singing with the school choir at funerals as I knew they would find it disturbing. Some were quite happy to go along and sing. Fortunately the school understood that some children would be upset so permission was requested for the child to go with the choir.
By not wanting sex-ed to be taught in schools does not mean that a parent is intent on "keeping children ignorant or feeding them bullshit about imaginary beings". Questions can still be answered and teaching your child these things can still occur. But you can be guided by your knowledge of your own child to know when would be the best time to give the information.

"some parents think their little darlings are too 'pure' to experience. "
Little darlings
Nothing to do with being too 'pure' but more to do with knowing how your child would deal with the information.

Agree with SEA that Y5 is early enough.

Juule: so is your point that kids should be taught everything at the rate suitable to the youngest/most easily upset member of the class, or that parents should withdraw their sensitive children? And if the latter, how many classes should parents be allowed to withdraw their sensitive DC from - ie if your DC is particularly sensitive to the sight of blood, should you be allowed to remove him/her from the first aid classes the rest of the school are having?

It's a clitoris and is as much a part of the body as an arm or a leg. Children touch it and it's nice but the sexual thoughts come later.

I teach in a secondary school and some children are very upset when we teach the holocaust/genocide etc. It doesn't mean we shouldn't teach it. We allow schools/the government to make decisions about waht children should be taught because thay are making rational decisions about what is good for our children.

Part of me wnats to have abig old rant and stop being so civilised and just oh for gods sake just go and home school them if you are that bloody bothered about fucking clitorisis.

Sorry for the spelling and grammar - typing errors!!

But why are we ranting about female gentitalia. There seems to be NO ranting about boys and pleasure from the penis (yes, penis and not willy).

I agree with sunshine, you are utterly transfering yours or society's ishoos wiht clitori onto this.

Ooooh is the plural of clitoris, clitori. I'm soooooo enlightened if it is