Safeguarding in UK Schools - new Statutory Guidance + existing classroom programme teaching 6yr olds to masturbate

[MoleSmokes]

I am going to link to a part of another current thread ("Writing to Your MP") and try to bring the discussion here in case it gets lost over there or ends up dominating the thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3698659-Writing-to-your-MP?msgid=90288651

In the UK, a child cannot legally consent to sexual acts and related activities. It is also an offence under law for an adult to engage in some activities in the presence of a child.

A UK "sexologist" Jonny Hunt is running a programme in Warwickshire school classrooms that includes teaching and encouraging children from age 6 how to masturbate.

Is this against the law?

Sexual Offences Act 2003 section 8 - Causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity.

He appears to have links to the Kinsey Institute. As part of the Kinsey's research into sexuality in the USA, parents were recruited and were required to masturbate their infants at home and record how the babies responded. The records of these "experiments" are in the public domain.

The Daily Mail covered this story recently (link in linked post above).

Related, covered in the same thread, the DfE have just released this:

Keeping children safe in education
Statutory guidance for schools and colleges on safeguarding children and safer recruitment

However, under "Sexual Abuse" there is no mention of age of consent and the impression is given that school children are able to engage in consensual sex, with anyone.

I have flagged @Spero (Sarah Philimore) and she is going to have a look at all this and advise if it is as bad as it looks.

The discussion starts here, in the thread "Writing to Your MP"

-------

Another current thread, about the views of "sexologist" James Cantor on paedophilia "as a valid neurological sexuality" that could be added to the LGBTQ+ alphabet, is related in that it is relevant to sexualising children and consent.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3699723-dr-james-cantor-anti-transing-children-pro-paedophilia-as-valid-sexuality

Yes Mole that’s the one. He has some very erm interesting views about children and sex, Dr Christian.

Thanks oldcrone , Year 2 are 6-7 year olds ! They should not be made to consider and think about rules for self ‘stimulation’ and the ‘rules’ of when it us appropriate to touch themselves . This is really revolting.

So, how would you deal with 6-7 year olds masturbating in the classroom?
Because it does happen, often. Often enough that a short chat,saying that it's fine and normal to touch our own private parts, but not when we're in public, seems pretty sensible to me.

No, as a teacher I don't WANT to have that conversation. Neither do I enjoy having to keep saying 'Please move your hands' or 'Please fold your arm's or 'Hands on the table please', when a simple chat might get the poi my across without making the child feel that they're being 'naughty'.

However uncomfortable adults may find it, children of all ages will self-stimulate from time to time. They may do this when anxious or simply because it feels nice

Or they may do it as learned behaviour from abuse, and what this moron doesn't get is opening the doors like this will reduce the amount of learned behaviour recognised.

what this moron doesn't get

This isn't a suggestion based on ignorance, these people know full well what they are doing / masking.

There really does need to be some serious investigation into the backgrounds of some of these adults who are writing and promoting much of this sexualised material for children and schools. At present people 'self identify' as experts in sex ed for children and as history tells us, that can be catastrophic for children's safety.

MrsK
I’m not a teacher and in your experience it happens but that means it needs to be handled appropriately and professionally. I feel there is no justification in teaching this as part of a curriculum, it normalises the behaviour; when it’s either innocent in which case your one to one chat is appropriate or learnt behaviour which needs further investigation.

It isn’t and was never intended to be a part of the statutory curriculum, or in any way intended for use in a normal classroom setting, just a piece of supplementary guidance for teachers to call on should they be concerned about a child’s public behaviour and therefore have a need.

But the behaviour is normal? And a one to one chat would be more of a concern IMO than a whole class session which basically follows the NSPCC guidelines, saying that privates are private and we don't touch or fiddle with them in public.

I honestly don't see why the very mention of masturbation causes such a concern.

@Knewmee you’re wrong about the guidance being optional. It’s statutory guidance which means that ‘must’ when used in it is a legal must and nonnegotiable. ‘Should’ when used in it is also used in its legal sense and schools will need to have a good reason to deviate. The guidance says schools must consult so that legally binding. It doesn’t say parents can veto though.

To repeat, the title and entire premise of this thread is completely inflammatory and has no basis at all in fact. ‘new Statutory Guidance + existing classroom programme teaching 6yr olds to masturbate’. I have read, in great detail, both the new statutory guidance for RSE and the specific content that this story is based on. The new statutory guidance says nothing whatsoever about masturbatuon/self- stimulation/touching - not one single thing. The RSE programme in question has no classroom content at all on the subject. It has one piece of teacher guidance, that, far from teaching children to masturbate, quite sensibly advises teachers on what to say should they witness behaviour inappropriate behaviour that is already occurring. If people are going to spout nonsense that they’ve read in the Sun, they should have the intelligence to do a little digging first to see if the story has any credibility, which in this case (as is usually the case) it does not, in any way.

AltheaVestr1t I posted a link and screenshot of the content that the Mail story was based on, and it does mention self-stimulation. Here's another screenshot (for year 4 this time).

Link I posted earlier.

Can you post a link to the guidance you mention?

It has one piece of teacher guidance, that, far from teaching children to masturbate, quite sensibly advises teachers on what to say should they witness behaviour inappropriate behaviour that is already occurring.

Can you post a link to this teacher guidance? Warwickshire Council seem to have removed all their content about RSE.

MrsKCastle
You don't speak to a whole class about masturbating in public because one child is doing it. You do quietly remind "Not in the classroom" etc and if the behaviour is repetitive - and certainly if the behaviour is copied by others - then speak to the safeguarding lead about an appropriate intervention.
It is right that people want to know, not just the 'qualifications' and credibility of people advocating talking to very young children about 'self pleasuring', but also challenging why certain adults are so determined that even very young children should be exposed to sexual discussions. I suspect that this is part of a plan to eradicate children's boundaries, erode the age of consent and ensure that children, especially girls, are trained to accept sexual practices that bring them no pleasure and often cause them harm. I hope I am proved wrong.

AltheaVestr1t
I agree that the statutory guidelines don't mention this. I've also read them in detail and think they're very constructive.
I wish that they were more detailed in some parts, especially given the range of organisations producing materials for schools and representing their materials as appropriate for children - when some are clearly not.

I honestly don't see why the very mention of masturbation causes such a concern

Adult language to describe behaviour in kids that for the main is meaningless and transient whilst for those who have been abused an indicator that something has gone very wrong in their lives.
Of course this adult sexual language applied to kids should be a cause for concern. It is totally inappropriate.

Althea I hope you are right but what are your thoughts on OldCrone’s screen shots ?

AltheaVestr1t
If people are going to spout nonsense that they’ve read in the Sun, they should have the intelligence to do a little digging first to see if the story has any credibility
You haven't even got the name of the paper right, have you even read what oldcrone and others have posted?

Statutory Guidance for Relatuonships and Sex Education: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/805781/Relationships_Education__Relationships_and_Sex_Education__RSE__and_Health_Education.pdf

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost - apologies, this story appeared in the Mirror, the Mail and the Sun, where I read them online on Monday. It probably appeared in the Daily Star too, as far as I know. I’ve posted a link to the Statutory Guidance for Relationships Education above, so you can read at your leisure and see clearly that there is no mention of masturbation or self-stimulation whatsoever. The document this story comes from is from a scheme of work published by Warwickshire County Council - the scheme of work is NOT statutory but rather is how WCC chose the interpret and implement the DfE guidance that I posted above. I can’t link this content because, as others have noticed, it has been removed. The word ‘self-stimulation’ is used in the teacher guidance provided with this content, but it is not a word that teachers would use to describe the concept to KS1 children. The same as they wouldn’t use words like ‘photosynthesis’ or ‘substantiate’ - because they are not age appropriate. This small piece of content from a very useful and protective scheme
of work has (surprise, surprise) been taken completely out of context.

‘I suspect that this is part of a plan to eradicate children's boundaries, erode the age of consent and ensure that children, especially girls, are trained to accept sexual practices that bring them no pleasure and often cause them harm. I hope I am proved wrong.’ Who’s great conspiracy do you think this is? The fiends who work in the education department at Warwickshire County Council?

AltheaVestr1t
History has shown us what can happen when good people unwittingly enable predators. Remember how respected hospitals, schools, the BBC feted and enabled an active paedophile like Jimmy Savile? The Jeremy Epstein scandal? The DfE / Ofsted / NSPCC remaining silent despite accurate complaints about groups deliberately undermining safeguarding rules / advocating parental alienation for "trans children"? Groups openly pushing their fetish and kinks at children at Pride? The NSPCC having to be pushed into dealing with a worker celebrating his sexual fetish in the workplace?
No I don't believe that most staff in Warwickshire are active paedophiles. But we are watching a relentless assault on children's safety alongside a determined and inappropriate sexualisation of children and must not remain silent. Hopefully the guidance is as contextual as you state - and I know it's not reflected in the statutory guidance. But too many people with dangerous views about child sexuality are currently being feted and allowed access to children and schools and if women don't stand up and protest, evidently nobody else is going to.

Certain people - Operation Yewtree was fake news and we should never worry that people might attempt to groom children, because that never happens.

I read them online on Monday. It probably appeared in the Daily Star too, as far as I know.

So in a post where you were shouting about fact checking and making sure statements are correct, you didn't do even the basics.

The word ‘self-stimulation’ is used in the teacher guidance provided with this content, but it is not a word that teachers would use to describe the concept to KS1 children.

So now it's been pointed out that it is used, you've change it to "yes but no teacher would ever use the term with children."

And you state you can't provide a source for this?

This small piece of content from a very useful and protective scheme
of work has (surprise, surprise) been taken completely out of context.

If one Council is irresponsible enough to misinterpret statutory guidance, others will follow.
You seem to be suggesting this should be ignored and people are over reacting. Why is minimising this so important to you?
I struggle to understand why any responsible adult would think it acceptable for children in Warwickshire to be exposed to this kind of thinking.

‘So in a post where you were shouting about fact checking and making sure statements are correct, you didn't do even the basics’ - I read the article in three different papers, read the source material and reflected on the DfE guidance that was referenced in the article, which I have read before, several times, from cover to cover.

Completely agree with Althea and in case my post was misunderstood earlier, I was referring to the dfe guidance.