Sex and Relationship education for 5-10 year olds.

[webquack]

Hi everyone. I'm looking for mums who are as angry as I am about the current government proposals to introduce compulsory sex and relationship education (SRE)for 5-10 year olds. I am also unashamedly asking for more signatures on the No. 10 website which is asking Gordon Brown to conduct a 12 week public consultation on these proposals so that parents and others can have their say. Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, and this inspite of decades of sex education in secondary schools. SRE hasn't worked. So what does the government do? They introduce the more SRE! Do you want your five-year-old to be naming body parts, being informed about intimacy and what is and isn't appropriate touching? Do you want your child sexualised at an early age and to lose their innocence any earlier than necessary? If not please join the growing chorus of concerned parents by going to: petitions.number10.gov.uk/Parentchoice

petitions.number10.gov.uk/Parentchoice

Do you want your five-year-old to be naming body parts, being informed about intimacy and what is and isn't appropriate touching?

YES absolutely!

I really like the sound of these proposals - if implemented properly they should help to reduce the teenage pregnancy rate.

What do you find frightening about five-year-olds knowing the names of body parts? And surely, knowing about appropriate and inappropriate touching would help a small child to resist or report sexual abuse?

"Do you want your five-year-old to be naming body parts, being informed about intimacy and what is and isn't appropriate touching?"

Well actually yes I do!

So sorry I won't be signing your petition. It all seems to make sense to me.

Hello Morning Paper. Ah, a government supporter. It still baffles me, in spite of all the evidence, how anyone, let alone a parent would want to expose their child in an untimely way to sexual content. Oh, by the way, you will probably also be happy to hear your New Labour wants to introduce sexual health clinics in all secondary schools where girls as young as 11 can be tested for pregnancy and STDs, given the morning after pill and where condoms will be available - all without parents knowing anything about it. Er, I also forgot to tell you - a few books which celebrate homosexuality - have also been recommended for primary and secondary schools by your New Labour. Thankfully they will be gone n the next election.

I don't think you'll find much support for homophobia and institutionalised ignorance on here, webquack. But don't let us stop you trying.

oh dear Lord! Celebrating homosexuality? Do we all have to wear SPANGLY THINGS?

Now who would like a Woo-Woo?

What is wrong with celecrating homosexuality fgs! If my DCs are gay (or even if they are not) than I would hope that their feelings and views are considered poitively as part of a rounded education.

I'll have a fluffy duck

Hi Policy wonk and Cece. Deary me - have you bothered to look at the facts? Ok let me keep it basic. (speaks slowly and clearly) for at least 3 decades sex education has been provided in secondary schools. Has it led to a decline in teenage pregnancies? (Speaks slowly and clearly again) No it hasn't. OK - forget me, ask the experts what they think. People who oppose these proposals do so because putting sex and relationships on young children's radars at such a young age simply prompts them to 'give it a go'. After all, once you have all the facts, what is there left but to go and try it out. The body parts seem harmless enough - but why does a five year old need to know what a clitoris is? And intimacy to a child should be nothing but mum and dad's warm parental hugs. The governmnet is tackling the problem from the wrong end of the spectrum. They want the child to do the job of teh police by identifying who and who isn't a paedophile! What a job for a small child! Isn't it the government's job to rather track down the culprits? And just what percentage of the child population is exposed to perverts? Come on ladies - think!

I think you are a loon...

I think teenagers try things out anyway. Surely it is better to educate them to be safe from diseases and pregnancy or make choices about what they want to do or not do! I am not sure ignorance is bliss in this instance.

OK webquack, let's take this one step at a time shall we

putting sex and relationships on young children's radars at such a young age simply prompts them to 'give it a go'.

Sex is on people's radars as soon as they step outside of their house, look at a billboard, open a magazine, switch on the television. Which is WHY it's so important that we put it IN CONTEXT for our children, and make it clear that this is not something 'adult' and 'mysterious' but is part of a normal person's healthy development, and part of a normal person's healthy relationships. Children masturbate from an early age - they should know that this won't damage them, and isn't wrong, but that their bodies are meant to feel nice when they touch them. That their bodies are THEIR to touch and explore. (That's Positive Touch, are you with me so far?)

After all, once you have all the facts, what is there left but to go and try it out.

Well I managed to stay a virgin until my wedding night and I was fairly well informed. (Only for my first wedding, OBVIOUSLY darling!)

The body parts seem harmless enough - but why does a five year old need to know what a clitoris is?

Well they have one, so why not know about it? We teach them about their heart and lungs which isn't really ESSENTIAL INFORMATION but it's part of learning all about the human animal, isn't it? And it's important that children CAN name the parts of their genitals - why should they be afraid of those words? Why should they be taboo?

And intimacy to a child should be nothing but mum and dad's warm parental hugs.

Well most school-age children will be experimenting with intimacy with their friends from an early age, whether that's cuddles or kissing or hands-down-pants. That's just what children DO. Which is why it's important for them to know that their is THEIR body and THEY say who touches it and NO ONE has a right to touch anyone else's body EVER.

The governmnet is tackling the problem from the wrong end of the spectrum. They want the child to do the job of teh police by identifying who and who isn't a paedophile!

Most abuse occurs within the family. How do Police identify paedophiles when they have no track record of convinctions? Do they have glass eyes or bad hair cuts?

What a job for a small child!

What a GREAT job for a small child - knowing that THEY are in charge of their bodies, knowing WHAT their bodies do and HOW, and knowing that they can ALWAYS say 'no' to anyone who is approaching them in a way that they don't want. What a great lesson - whether you are 5 or 25 or 65! Bring it on!

Yes, cece, but not at age 5-10. Are children allowed a childhood in this country? Evidently not. Our government wants children to grow up as quickly as possible - to get you lot back to work - to boost the economy. All that concerns New Labour is money, money amd more money. All their policies are aimed at boosting teh economy, and getting mums back to work ASAP boosts the economy. Who will pay the price for this? Your children , of course.

Well look now you are confusing all your Hobby Horses

separate them out at least, some of us have work to do

webquack, you are simply wrong in your assumptions.

The teenage pregnancy is high because teens are exposed to inappropriate sexualised imagery from an early age, not because they get age-appropriate and accurate infomation. Additional reasons include low self-esteem and lack of opportunities or hopes for the future beyond "a baby to love me".

Children who do not know accurate names for body parts still have them, and are at least as likely to seek information about them by checking out their own and others bits.

Intimacy should only be hugs - but many children are being forced into sexual activities by adults who find their ignorance of what is and is not appropriate helps them to hide it. A child who can talk about inappropriate behaviour is more protected than one who can't.

Ignorance does not equal innocence.
Information does not equal depravity.

I'm not convinced that this will reduce the teenage pregnancy rate but I honestly don't see what wrong with calling a clitoris a clitoris. My dcs (Catholic) primary already has books with homosexual characters in them. Whats this got to do with working mothers?

"Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, and this inspite of decades of sex education in secondary schools."

So how come the Scandinavian countries, who have had compulsory sex education for much longer, have far lower rates of teenage pregnancies than Britain? My experience of Scandinavian youngsters is that they are far less sexualised than British youngsters.

"After all, once you have all the facts, what is there left but to go and try it out."

Erhmmm? Not trying it out, perhaps? Learning it as yet another interesting biological fact to be remembered in case you need it later.

My dcs have been taught about people entering burning buildings (firefighters) or setting to sea in a small boat during a storm (Grace Darling)or people hunting animals in the bush (African geography)- yet they have not felt impelled to try any of these activities for themselves. They know that these are things that adults do, under far different circumstances from themselves.

Or should children not be taught anything about the adult world because they are not yet ready for adult activities?

If a child does not need to know what a clitoris is, does she need to know what a kidney is? Should we just scrap science teaching altogether? Or just cut out the bits that you feel uncomfortable with?

They are not teaching the child to let someone else get intimate with their clitoris; this is not actually how teachers spend sex education lessons.

I was taught about procreation as a 5-year-old, from a book with beautiful coloured photographs of babies growing in the womb. I can assure you that I did not feel impelled to go out and "try it for myself" until about 15 years later.

Oh and might I comment on what an unusual choice of subject you have made for your first post on Mumsnet?

Bets on whats next, i say immigration what say you?

Morning Paper - you really ARE a New Labour supporter. My goodness, I feel I am talking to Jim Knight himself. Please get a mind of your own. Yes, we live in a sex soaked society - but whose responsibility is it to guide and teach your child about sex and relationships? why, it's YOURS, of course. Until now no one has managed to tell me why inspite of so much SRE in schools we in the UK have the highest teengage pregnancy rates.

Well, you tell me why in spite of a much longer tradition of SRE there is so little teenage pregnancy in Scandinavia?

And while you are about it, would I be incorrect in stating that teenage pregnancy rate in the UK were actually much higher before SRE?

Do we have the highest teenage pregnancy rates? I thought the USA, with its very loud abstinence campaigns, was higher than the UK?

You clearly have no idea what they actually teach them.

I have been entirely happy at the level they have set the PSHE part of the curriculum.

Particularly since my foster daughter has been sexually abused and has a sexual preoccupation. The level they have set the information has not increased in any way her sexual preoccupation. Instead it has informed her, taught her safety, and prepared her for adulthood.

All I will say is in Hollandthey have huge amounts of Sex ed from a very young age and they do not have high rates of teenage pregnancy.

I would like to applaud the government for finally doing something about this.

Lets sort out stuffy Britain, and allow our children to have information and facts about life