Miriam Cates report on RSE

[RPMcMurphy]

Starting a new thread as this report is being discussed in others and I think it needs a thread of its own.

Report available here:
www.newsocialcovenant.co.uk/RSE%20BRIEFING%20FINAL%201631%20(IS)_small.pdf

Lots of media attention around it, even mainstream TV news, and plenty of press.

(Not) to my surprise, there is quite a bit of pushback on social media, of the usual 'it isn't happening, and even if it is it's only in a few schools, and even if it is in a lot of schools who cares you are all pearl-clutching bigots'.

Also unsurprised by the response of head teachers, given the numerous reports here on Mumsnet about their behaviour when parents express concerns:
“Head teachers said they were unhappy about the review. James Bowen, director of policy the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “It is hard to be anything other than deeply concerned by this announcement.”"

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fb68df7c-bdc4-11ed-8959-aac6a1130ac2?shareToken=bf5da7c9d4de81e288a9d29fa865ba99

Please please please write to your MP, ccing the Pm and Gillian Keegan to say you support this review and that it must be quick and independent. Let them know that this is popular!

Do not allow the naysayers to have the loudest voices.

Yes yes yes! Saw this and I'm glad you started a post!

This was in my email from the telegraph:

Rishi Sunak has ordered an urgent review of sex education after The Telegraph exposed evidence of the widespread teaching of "age inappropriate" materials in schools. MPs have welcomed the news, but warned that the review must be independent as the Department for Education has produced "confusing" guidance. This week, nearly 50 Conservative MPs wrote to the Prime Minister urging him to launch an independent inquiry.

The government discovered that invoking S35 was in fact popular (despite a lot of pressure not to do it), so we have to make them see that conducting this review quickly will also be popular!

Interesting replies from Tory peers to Keegan here:

twitter.com/jfoster2019/status/1633609681938661378?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

I checked the DfE page but can't see the promised review / consultation

James Bowen's response is concerning. Does a serious safeguarding problem have to be widespread before you do something about it?

The NAHT's decision to work with Diversity Role Models coincided with the ASDA "love has no age limit" story. They either chose DRM before or just after that broke. Either way, they stuck by their decision.

I’m finding her husband’s Twitter involvement in this fascinating. I can’t think of any other time a. Minister’s spouse has inserted themselves into something in this way and he’s so very very defensive

twitter.com/michaelkeegan14/status/1633547581169999872?s=61&t=8CxL28ZCFDq66yuIWhY6_Q

“James Bowen, director of policy the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “It is hard to be anything other than deeply concerned by this announcement.””

Deeply Concerned as in ‘worried about it being necessary, as that would mean kids have already been subjected to harmful material’?

or

Deeply Concerned as in ‘worried that loads of head teachers are gonna get busted over harmful material being used in their schools, making us all look irresponsible at best and like paedo-enablers at worst’?

Crikey.

Figured that one worth preserving with a screen shot - what’s the Baroness Jenkins tag about? Had a quick look but couldn’t spot any relevant tweets from her?

The Baroness responded to the original tweet

That’s a different Baroness

Safe Schools Alliance are quite right. "If requested" isn't good enough. Why is the onus on the parents/carers to have the time, energy, and confidence to ask what exactly they are teaching my children? And what if they say no? I then have to go away to research my rights on getting the information, go back to the school and make my point and hope they they agree to provide it. And that just to see the information, never mind bring up if I have an issue. Why do I have to do all the leg work? And face the awkwardness of asking and probing? This shouldn't be on the parents.

My child is 7 and I've only just started to really look into all this. I am an anxious person and not the kind who would feel comfortable about having to investigate my child's school and raise my head above the parapet if I had concerns.

Thank you to those that have spoken up.

In my dd's school you can request to view the materials but you need to make an appointment to go into the school to view.

And it can’t be a simple mix up of two baronesses because their @‘s are nothing alike (@ baronessjenkin and @ jfoster2019 )

I wonder if the education secretary’s husband has just given away something relating to behind the scenes discussion?

Baroness Jenkin isn’t someone I’m familiar with but a quick Google for ‘Baroness jenkin terf’ gave me this: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/23/changed-mind-trans-self-identification/ and she’s a Tory with lots of pro women tweets so I wonder if she’s one of Miriam’s informal team working on these issues?

My mum was on the PTA when I was a kid and I distinctly remember her helping organise an event where all parents of year 6 (4th year juniors back then!) could attend together to have a preview of the planned Sex Ed lesson. The teacher demo’d the whole thing as if it were the lesson itself showed the video on the big telly with legs, answered questions and provided hand outs and then the PTA served tea and biscuits.

Parents could sign up for just the boys lesson, just the girls lesson or both, one after the other. All done in 2.5 hours or so.

There were no secrets and it ensured the teachers were using age appropriate material that didn’t cross any boundaries (or they wouldn’t dare present it to the parents session).

I distinctly remember my mum commenting on how few dads were attending (one of my best female friends was being raised by a single dad and my mum was trying to get him along for the sake of his daughter, so that she would be able to talk it over with him afterwards if necessary).

Of course, this was all very mild stuff at a primary in the mid 80s and I’m sympathetic re: teachers already having to do individual parents evenings etc but surely having a dedicated event and getting all the queries dealt with in one go is a better use of school resources than having to deal with ad hoc queries, individual appointments to view the materials and then even more time with the leadership team to air complaints?

These days they could put it online in a private area and give parents a log in.

Head teachers said they were unhappy about the review. James Bowen, director of policy the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “It is hard to be anything other than deeply concerned by this announcement.

“The overwhelming majority of schools are doing nothing more than following the government’s own statutory guidance when it comes to relationships and sex education. The current curriculum was subject to extensive consultation before it was introduced.

What is the reason why it's not being followed in that case? Or if it is being followed, it's obviously completely inappropriate.

“We have seen no evidence to suggest there is a widespread problem with pupils being presented with age-inappropriate materials and if this were the situation, we would expect it to have been picked up on a case-by-case basis.

What is the point of this response?

He just wants the government to deal with the specific cases? What difference does it make if there is an overall review?

I don't understand it.

Why wouldn't you do an overall review? Why would you do this piecemeal, as and when it comes up, instead of giving statutory guidance that must be followed, by absolutely everyone?

Exactly.

I think it was Peter Tatchell who said this material must be viewed in school, where the parents are forced to make an appointment to come in, in order to dissuade them.

School Governor here. I actually think that head teachers and governors have been put in a really difficult position. There is real pressure from some parents to affirm their child’s ‘gender identity’, and precious little guidance from the D of E on how to deal with conflicting views. And as they have so many other serious issues to deal with, the temptation to just copy a Mermaids approved Trans Policy document is real.

Geoff Barton, General Secretary of ASCL is quoted in The Guardian

www.theguardian.com/education/2023/mar/08/sex-education-review-is-politically-motivated-say-teaching-unions

“The vast majority of schools are incredibly cautious and sensible about the teaching of RSE and we disagree with the sweeping generalisation and inflammatory rhetoric from Miriam Cates in the Commons."

“Schools are doing their best to teach children and young people about things like being safe and respectful relationships in a sensitive and age-appropriate manner, but they are constantly subjected to unhelpful potshots from various individuals and groups."

Absolutely. Massive government fail.

At the very least they should’ve told schools that pupils should only transition if there is a specialist NHS doctor involved to supervise and support that transition (generally via a multi disciplinary team).

Which would then make all the gender related stuff in sex ed much simpler to deal with because you can use ordinary male/female language and just briefly point out that some people have a medical diagnosis that means they need tailored info on contraception and sexual health that isn’t covered in the general lesson (eg FtM people on testosterone should use mini pill rather than combined pill but with the doctor supervision rule you wouldn’t have loads of pupils saying they aren’t their birth sex and it probably wouldn’t even come up in most schools).

However, headteachers who have allowed stuff like the Proud Trust’s explicit dice game into their schools need to be held accountable. Anyone who looked at that and said ‘yep fine’ either had a serious lapse in their normal professionalism OR isn’t suited to work with children at all.

So it is!

Agreed. Add to this the tories "bonfire of red tape" and reluctance to 'interfere" - thus inadvertently allowing the very group of people who should be nowhere near children or schools to offer toxic advice, materials and "training". Too many schools lacked due diligence. The NAHT (who originally produced some appalling "trans guidelines" for schools which they've now hidden) were captured at an early stage and are totally complicit in this shitshow.

In academic publications, there's little as irritating as reading "If requested." It's overwhelmingly a flag that the authors will gatekeep their data and start adding conditions around who has access and constantly finding reasons why they you don't fulfil these dynamic criteria.

I don't know why that came to mind. It's not as if the headteachers or anyone else would start to generate reasons as to why somebody is not an appropriate party to see the materials…

Tom Swarbrick on LBC will be discussing RSE, specifically what is being taught on Sex, gender and sexuality after 4pm

He wants your views!
Phone 0345 60 60 973
Text 84850