I'm so pleased to see that nobody has started a hysterical 'they're teaching my 5yr old about sex' thread

[myredcardigan]

That's it really.
I saw the news and groaned thinking MN would have 200 posts from parents whipped into a frenzy by inaccurate media representation.

Glad to see that most parents on here understand that it's the 'relationship' part of sex & relationship education that we teach to young children.
1)Interaction with peers
2)Family dynamics and relationships with parents and siblings.
3)People who help us.

As they move through primary school they look at
1)Body part and their functions
2)Keeping healthy
3)Keeping clean

Then when its more age appropriate

1)Menstuation
2)Sex and masturbation (last term of Y6)

This is all very age appropriate and sex is taught as being within the context of a loving,secure adult relationship. The concept of casual sex is covered later at secondary school.
Importantly, they learn that with these 'rights' come responsibilities.

Also, respect (for themselves and each other) is at the very core of the entire programme.

It's great that you were completely aware, scorpio1. However, I speak to teenage mums on a regular basis (as part of my job) and the vast majority of them tell me that they feel their sex-ed was inadequate and that they had little or no idea that they could get pg first time/standing up etc. No did they feel comfortable and confident about contraceptive.

In an ideal world all parents would answer all questions as and when they arise and fully prepare their children for this aspect of their lives. But it just doesn't happen.

how are these "new" guidelines different?

Well there is higher rates of teen pregnancy in areas of deprivation! That's a statistical fact. That's not to say teenage girls from affluent homes do not fall pregnant nor that all teenage girls in poverty-stricken areas will get pregnant. That's just stats.

Elf, they are no different and the vast majority of schools are already doing this. Only difference now is that it will be compulsory.

I didn't see all the details this moring on BBC just the headline. I did wonder what was different, as it seems this is what happened when I went to school!

I find it quite sad that teenagers don't know how easy it is to get pregnant - the in the bath myth, etc.

Oh yes i do totally agree with the stats - just know that we are not all like this, and some of us do turn out just fine, lol

When you say compulsory do you mean parents can no longer sign a form for their dc to opt out of these lessons?

Are they/will they be split into girls and boys groups or mixed?

I was kept out of the 'talk' in primary school as my parents didn't think it was appropriate. In senior school our biology teacher was an embarrassed male in an all girls school and kept putting it off and putting it off.

I've still not formally been told anything by anyone.

DD (2) knows enough to pass me a tampon today when I went the toilet. I plan on giving her age appropriate answers to every question she asks.

According to Radio 4, the difference is that sex will have to be taught in the context of relationships (the value of stable relationships, including same-sex relationships) - not just as the biological process of reproduction.

Mercy, nomy understanding is that the compulsory part relatesto the school. So all schools will now have to have a programme of study in place and timetabled sessions.

RE is also compulsory in English schools yet parents have the right to withdraw their children if they wish.

Smithagain, that is just one of the examples of inaccurate reporting. Never have I taught in a primary school where sex-ed was not taught in the context of relationship education. It just doesn't happen like that. No teacher in their right mind would start spouting the mechanics of sex to a 5yr old or even an 11yr old without it being age appropriate and put in context.

I think the schools should be teaching this stuff. However, wonder how they get round all the different 'moral' issues. Are these discussed?
Also interested to know what 'relationship education' involves. We never had that at school. Come to think of it all the sex ed we had was biology of small mammals, and personal hygiene advice! Next to useless.
The start of HIV was when it became acceptable to mention condoms.

Very glad to hear it, myredcardigan - I was somewhat surprised myself!

I am still interested in the idea that 5/6 yr olds could not cope with the idea of menstruation.

I'm puzzled as to why not?

Both DS (4) and DD (6) know about 'soft lining for a baby, if no baby then no need and body lets it go'. They do not seem to view that information any differently from an explanation of what is happening if you are sick, or what poo is. Just things which happen to your body that involve stuff coming out (as it were).

Increased amounts of sex education over the last thirty years hasn't seen STD and teen pregnancy rates falling, has it?

I would imagine that most teenage pregnant girls knew a lot about sex and contraception from very young.

I think what would get both those rates falling is actually more rigorous vocational education of girls in the non-academic streams at school. Keep them busy learning how to cook, sew, do hairdressing and acquire childcare qualifications so that they can actually see themselves having solid careers and won't be quite so keen to 'fall' pregnant.

and lets not be totally sexist and educate the guys that aswell

Not worried about the sex education as such but am a little at what they teach them in RE. Ds came home yesterday and asked what it's like for Jewish boys when they cut their willies off.

myredcardigan - but any fule kno that they will cover homosexuality, and that homosexuality cannot be taught without teaching 'how to DO it' because that is the nature of learning nowadyas - not 'ways of thinking', but how to do it. Therefore it will entail demonstrations with butt plugs, strap-ons - and safer sex involving dental dams.

Would that be frenzied enough for you?

What planet are you on Blu?

Thanks for that post Blu. Made me !

I think that Blu, like many somewhere-over-40 Mners, comes from the Planet "Hysteria about Jenny Lives with Elton and David" or whatever that ground-breaking book about same-sex couples as parents was called. Sadly it made a lot of homophobics' heads explode...

Lol, Blu!

Just what I was expecting!

'Keep them busy learning how to cook, sew, do hairdressing and acquire childcare qualifications so that they can actually see themselves having solid careers '

And not D&T / electronics / IT / car maintenenace / plumbing then?

Gawd what decade do you come from? you sound like my teacers way back in the early 80's!

Just as a note, childcare was compulsory (or effectively so- they only accepted your options form if completed that way- for 'lower itelligence' girls at my school; I was one of the lucky sods forced into it (had wanted to do Physics). Guess what? I can name 10 of that class of 30 preggers before 20. Clearly the course didn't keep them busy enough!.

I completely beleive in the teaching of sex ed at a young age, and am glad this is getting a positive respone.

I am all for it. It's basic biology.

Leads to some rather baffled questions though, which is fun.

My 5 year old knows about menstruation. I am a single mum, he is fascinated by my 'nappies'. I had to explain about them before he told the world I was incontinent.

I think, as do most posters here, that the key is age related explanation. My ds was 3 and a half when he asked how dd got into my tummy, and at that stage daddy giving mummy some special seeds to put into her tummy with her egg was enough, and he hasn't asked for the mechanics of it yet. I haven't discussed periods with them yet though - quite private about it even with DH, not that I'm a prude or anything, but I guess like some bitches in season I prefer to clean myself up away from everyone. I can remember being really quite upset in my first sex ed lesson though, and I was 11.