who should educate your child state or you ?

[Isdore]

I am worried about something and i would like us parent to take action against this trend of eroding parental responsibility. I feel the state wants to take away of our role has parents.

i have 3yr old (to young yet !) i am very worried about this !! :( :(

Please don't take the guidlines at face value-ask your school what content they are using

we need to write our MPs : stoprse.com/index.php/contact-your-local-mp/

They going to expose our children to sexualise content at the age of 3 on wards. They will decide(guidelines) this in the next 2 months

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/235053 - please share this

Currently (January 2019) a subject known as Sex & Relationship Education (SRE) is taught in some UK schools; it is not compulsory and parents can withdraw their children.

However, the law is changing ….

• From 1st September, 2020 Relationship Education will be taught as compulsory in all primary schools across England (from Reception Class upwards).

• From 1st September, 2020 Relationship & Sex Education (RSE) will be taught as compulsory across all secondary schools across England.

• The government has produced draft guidelines (July 2018) on what must be taught but these are currently vague and minimal. However, they do state that L_G+B+T+ issues must be taught to all children and recommend that these issues are taught across the entire school curriculum. We are currently awaiting the finalised guidelines which should be produced in Spring 2019.

• Schools must develop their own Relationship Ed/RSE policy and curriculum and are free to determine how to teach Relationship Ed/RSE issues. Schools are free to choose whichever Relationship Ed/RSE resources they decide upon; however, the guidelines state these must be ‘age-appropriate’ and sensitive to the needs of the pupils.

• The draft guidelines clearly state that schools must work and consult with parents on the development of the Relationship Ed/RSE policy and the curriculum it uses.

I have also heard rumours that they are going after home schooling under the pretext of "boogy monster topics you see in news"! its unacceptable.

Has a catholic and parent we should have the rights and freedom to choose whats best for our children not the state or the lobby groups!

We believe it is the parent’s fundamental right to teach their child RSE topics or to at least decide who teaches them and when and how they are taught. We want the right to opt our children out of RSE when it becomes mandatory in Sept 2020.

More details
We have grave concerns about the physical, psychological and spiritual implications of teaching children about certain sexual and relational concepts proposed in RSE and believe that they have no place within a mandatory school curriculum.

We believe the above factors have not been given enough consideration and that many of the RSE resources being produced by lobby groups and external organisations will actually cause more harm than good, particularly when child development and psychological factors are considered.

[Shinyletsbebadguys]

You are aware that discussions about sexuality is not remotely the same as sexualising children as you stated in your first post ? In the gentlest way you do know those sentences have different meanings?

Why are you saying it's explicit ? So you are upset that they will discuss lgbt issues and also upset at explicit sexual references....why do you believe it will be explicit and not age appropriate? Where's your evidence?

I am genuinely now wondering if you understand the meanings of some of the words you use?? Saying that lesbians exists is not a explicit sexual term

[goldengummybear]

I think that there is a serious problem in primary schools as many children believe in a very narrow definition for each sex- Only boys like Fortnite and Football, only girls like unicorns and glitter etc I would like more talks on how girls can like football and gaming and still be girls and boys can like pink and princesses and still be boys. I think that there's a lot of children who would benefit from that. Obviously this isn't a trans issue but our kids need to be reprogrammed from the pink/blue marketing from elsewhere.

I have children who have done primary school SRE and it's far from explicit.

Knowing about sex doesn't take away childhood. Has knowing about different sexualities changed yours? Children are good at accepting differences and it's better to be 5 and find out that somebody has 2 Dads rather than a mum and dad rather than it all to be hush hush and you find out at age 10 and the "secret" makes it strange.

[MrsJayy]

So you don't want your child taught that being in a same sex relationship is fine and actually normal ?

[prh47bridge]

You have reproduced a report by the Jewish Chronicle report. This makes it appear that Mr Mearns asked two questions whereas he actually asked one covering the points mentioned by the JC. It is, of course, somewhat unfair to expect the Chief Inspector from Ofsted to answer questions that should properly be aimed elsewhere.

It is, perhaps, also worth mentioning that the quote from Mrs Spielman is only part of a sentence. The full sentence was, "But the expectation is that in an age appropriate way that children should be aware of the protected characteristics, absolutely not talk mechanical details, but what is set out at the moment—and reinforced at the moment only by a tribunal decision—is that generalised respect is not the same thing as respect for the protected characteristics." So no explicit talks about sexuality.

[Drogosnextwife]

I honestly can't see your problem with their proposal.

[OddBoots]

The people who object to this seem to even object to story books featuring same sex relationships, completely pushing out children whose parents are same sex or whose uncle, aunt, sibling are. It makes it look like it isn't normal when the reality is that it is. The state has no choice when there are parents out there.

[OddBoots]

The state has no choice when there are parents out there who think and act like that*

[WinkysTeatowel]

The website you have linked states "In particular, it is the teaching of of secular liberal sexual ideologies, to the youngest of children and against their parents wishes, in schools, that Stop RSE opposes and aims to challenge."
I'd be interested to know what these "secular liberal sexual ideologies" are?

Government policy states RSE & RE will be age appropriate and likely include:

*- different types of relationships, including friendships, family relationships, dealing with strangers and, at secondary school, intimate relationships;

• how to recognise, understand and build healthy relationships, including self-respect and respect for others, commitment, tolerance, boundaries and consent, and how to manage conflict, and also how to recognise unhealthy relationships;
• how relationships may affect health and wellbeing, including mental health;
• healthy relationships and safety online; and
• factual knowledge, at secondary school, around sex, sexual health and sexuality, set*

firmly within the context of relationships.

What is your issue with this?

[BackforGood]

The state really has no choice, as most right thinking people would like to aim to live in a society filled with tolerance, understanding, respect and friendship.
Unfortunately, there are bigoted parents, and there are also some ignorant parents who would never teach these things, so that is why the state has to step in.

[Iggly]

I would take “age appropriate” to be just that, “age aporopriate”.

I would then welcome the opportunity to have a discussion with my child about it. Because they’ll pick it up from somewhere if not at school.

[dolphin50]

i think this is plain awful that they are trying to take the rights of parents away from their kids. i am so thankful i home educate and the number of home educated kids are rising which is a direct link to parents losing control of what their kids are learning. when i was 7 i thought babies came from a womans tummy, i didn't know that sex was involved. sex was just something we giggled at. why does a 3 YEAR OLD need to know about sex. completely taking innocence away from a child. parents have very different views and children will listen to their parents more than a teacher. if a child grows up in a house where they think you go to hell for being gay than if they teach LGBT and some kid says my mummy says thats wrong to a child with LBGT parents its putting a teacher in an awkward position. they can't say thats right or wrong if a child has an opinion expressed by their parents especially not when a kid is 5. in america kids don't start school until 6. why is there this feeling that as soon as a child can talk they need to know about relationships. women and men have children together and gay and lesbian couples can have children through adoption or from a surrogate. the majority of people in this country are straight and there are LGBT people who should be included and haven't always been. talking to a small child about equality when they have no clue of the history behind the injustice is too much. when kids are learning to play and socialise they don't need to talk about things that i was learning about as a teenager. they are kids. if a parent wants to talk to their child about the birds and the bees early than that is fine but being forced into their child knowing it before they can read or write properly isn't. teachers in my opinion are there to guide their academic life, parents are there to guide their personal life. i am not a catholic. i am a christian but come from a non judgemental universal approach to it and i support the LGBT community, womens rights and blacks rights but i don't want my small children who believe in father christmas and the tooth fairy losing their innocence before they enjoy their childhood first. thankfully home educated kids can't be touched by school regulations. when i was 11 we had sex education and the teacher could hardly talk about it without the class being in hysterics. imagine having to teach 6 year olds about it. to me children shouldn't know about every detail of the adult world. they should have their childhood first. if i knew at 4 about puberty and sex. boys were icky and only friends of mine back then. this is before hormones kicking in. my six year old daughter who i educate is learning about fairytales and creating her own ones up, about medieval britain with knights and castles, religious festivals, dinosaurs and creation and evolution, shapes and circle time done in a home school group. my daughter and her younger siblings see healthy relationships all around them from parents to grandparents and friends of mine and knows about life and love at the level she is at. children can't watch films at 6 with sexual references. they are usually 12 or 15 films. i teach her about how to treat family and friends and if she chose a boyfriend out of her group of friends at her age i'd see it as holding hands innocence and i teach her to treat everyone with respect. if she chose a girlfriend it would be the same thing

[BertrandRussell]

Sometimes I do wonder whether they should ban home education.........

[SureIusedtobetaller]

They are not going to teach three year olds about sex. They will teach the little ones about the pants rule, some age appropriate growing up facts, and it will be very focused on knowing that people are different (eyes, hair, height etc).
People see the word sex and lose their shit.
Actual puberty and basic sex stuff is for year 5 onwards.

[SureIusedtobetaller]

Also slightly concerned that someone home edding doesn’t seem to be aware that full stops are followed by capital letters....

[UnderMajorDomoMinor]

I think it’s fascinating that you didn’t link to the draft guidance where people could see what’s proposed and instead linked to some bullshit petition. It’s almost like you have an agenda about this

Here’s the draft guidance, looks sound to me. Lots of references to ‘age appropriate’ and I noticed the core content is ‘by the end of primary’ Rather than, as you imply, as young as possible.

consult.education.gov.uk/pshe/relationships-education-rse-health-education/

[Cheetahssitonfajitas]

I'm all for it. About time too. (As someone who was sent to catholic school and received zero education on these matters until a very flimsy attempt, from both DM and the school, way too late. Now a staunch atheist!) I worked hard to get DS into a non-faith school after my experiences. You sound like my polar opposite so I guess the opposite would appeal - work hard to get your kids into a faith school.

[Frogstaring]

Dolphin- they aren't going to be teaching 3 year olds about sex, that would be a few years later.
if a child grows up in a house where they think you go to hell for being gay than if they teach LGBT and some kid says my mummy says thats wrong to a child with LBGT parents its putting a teacher in an awkward position
And if the teacher doesn't mention it, then the child grows up thinking that gay people are wrong and are going to hell- there's a reason that schools need to cover such subjects.

[Cheetahssitonfajitas]

Also my DS (5) knows the mechanics of how babies are made. He asked, he's a curious child and I'm not going to lie to him and storks. He's seen me menstruate and knows why. He knows men can fall in love with men and women with women and that there are no rules. None of this has compromised his innocence. None of it is 'sexual' just biological. He has no giddiness or giggling about it because he's not been taught any different and it has been presented to him as fact. He hasn't given it a second thought after he has asked the question and been given an honest and age appropriate answer. It's the opposite of how I was raised and I hope to goodness it results in him having far less hang-ups, squeamishness, embarrassment and taboo than I experienced as a young adult!

[SassitudeandSparkle]

It will be age-appropriate, I was surprised at how bland my DD's sex education was in year 4, someone raised the point then that same-sex relationships were not even covered so that's not a bad thing if that is included in future.

[Molytol]

but i don't want my small children who believe in father christmas and the tooth fairy losing their innocence before they enjoy their childhood first.

How is my DS losing his innocence by understanding that his Auntie B and Auntie C are in a relationship, just like his Mum and Dad?

[Tomorrowillbeachicken]

Part of the earliest sex ed is the pants rule and I think that is vital. If it stops one child being abused then it should be compulsory.

[creativeusername]

Slightly off topic, but I'm a teacher and if a child in my class said that being gay is wrong, I would absolutely challenge that. It's my job to promote British values, including tolerance of others. We are trained and experienced in "awkward" conversations!

[Tomorrowillbeachicken]

i do wonder at the Catholic churches preaching over sex though, especially in the wake of the recent admittance by the Pope.

[lljkk]

Stop Arse dot com? Ah come on. You can do better than that.

Oh Damn, I forgot to teach my children about the Tooth Fairy. Woe is me!

[CloserIAm2Fine]

It’s because some parents refuse to teach their children about sex, relationships, tolerance etc that schools have to

I see nothing at all to object to here, apart from the ignorant few who are trying to block it, but then I don’t think there’s a petition against a petition is there?