100 organisations ask Labour to abandon Tory revised guidelines on RSHE

[IwantToRetire]

The Conservative government launched a consultation in May on planned updates to guidance first issued in 2019, following a review of the reforms.

It proposed age limits on “sensitive” topics, ordered schools not to teach about “gender identity” and to share materials with parents.

Ministers were accused at the time of stirring up “culture war” issues in the run-up to the election.

The consultation closes today.

To coincide with its closure, more than 100 organisations including the ASCL and NAHT leaders’ unions, the PSHE Association, Sex Education Forum, Barnardo’s, Refuge and Everyone’s Invited have issued a joint statement calling for a “fresh start” to the review.

“We are calling on the next government to discard the draft guidance and begin this process in due course, focusing on the needs of children and young people and supporting teachers to deliver a high-quality, inclusive curriculum.”

Lucy Emmerson, CEO of the Sex Education Forum, said age restrictions would be a “backward step making children more vulnerable to abuse and harm”.

PSHE association chief executive Jonathan Baggaley, warned he had “deep concerns about the development process and shortcomings of the draft guidance, particularly on critical aspects of children’s safeguarding, wellbeing and inclusion”.

And Lynn Perry, chief executive of Barnardo’s, said introducing age limits to RSHE topics “risks children missing out on crucial teaching about abuse and exploitation”.

Continues at https://schoolsweek.co.uk/labour-faces-pressure-to-ditch-tory-rshe-reforms/

Possibly slightly off topic, but I find it really distasteful to use laughing emojis when discussing CSA and safeguarding.

Makes the writer look like they think this is all just a game in which to score points.

I find it more than slightly distasteful to have this kind of misrepresentation of me made.
It's really weird to boast about how you've tried to remove safeguarding measures from children.

I'll stop using laughing emojis when posters stop smearing me with offensive nonsense like this.

I'm going to sound a bit peevish in saying this, but if there is a link in an OP saying full or more information, it is probably worth following the link to know all the details. So just a reminder this is the full statement made by the groups:

The full statement

Relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) helps to protect children and young people from harm, keep them healthy and prepare them for life’s challenges and opportunities.

The current statutory guidance for RSHE in England – in force since 2020 – is based on robust evidence, informed by a rigorous engagement process and a twelve-week consultation.

It had support and input from safeguarding bodies, national children’s charities, specialist violence against women and girls organisations, faith and belief groups, parents and carers, teachers, teaching and leadership unions and young people, and votes of support from 538 MPs from across the political spectrum.

The current guidance provides the foundation on which schools have improved teaching of high quality, age-appropriate RSHE since 2020, despite Covid disruption.

Any review of RSHE must build on this progress and focus on responding to the needs and experiences of those the guidance will support: children and young people, teachers and schools.

‘Falls short’

We are concerned that the draft new RSHE guidance out for consultation until 11 July falls short of what is required to help keep children safe, healthy and prepared for modern life.

Age restrictions and topic bans pose a threat to the preventative role of RSHE, limiting the prevention of harm in relation to issues including sexual health, violence against women and girls (VAWG), mental health, safeguarding from sexual abuse, inclusion and tackling current and emerging threats like online misogyny.

The limited scope and structure of the review, and reduced eight-week consultation, is also problematic, as is the general election falling during this consultation period (thereby removing the opportunity for planned Department for Education stakeholder engagement).

A fresh start and a new review is needed. We are calling on the next government to discard the draft guidance and begin this process in due course, focusing on the needs of children and young people and supporting teachers to deliver a high-quality, inclusive curriculum.

‘Future updates to RSHE must be…’

Evidence based: using the best available evidence of what works in preventative education and the needs and experiences of all children and young people, so that it is effective, relevant, up-to-date and age and developmentally-appropriate.

Transparent: any evidence and recommendations that inform new proposals should be published, as should any evaluations of RSHE under current guidance.

Representative: there should be ongoing engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, including parents and carers, children and young people, teachers and teaching and leadership unions, national safeguarding bodies, children’s charities and specialist VAWG organisations, academics and experts.

My kids aren't at school age yet so I was genuinely looking for info about why they chose these age limits so I can understand and be prepared. Wasn't trying to cause an argument sorry!

This is how Schools Weekly summarised the Tory proposals

1. Age limits on ‘sensitive’ topics

The DfE said it was introducing age limits on certain topics “to ensure that, as content is presented to prepare young people to stay safe and keep others safe, children are not introduced too early to concepts that they may not have the maturity to grasp, or which may be distressing”.

Here’s the full list…

Not before year 3

• The risks relating to online gaming, video game monetisation, scams, fraud and other financial harms, and that gaming can become addictive
• Why social media, some apps, computer games and online gaming, including gambling sites, are age restricted

Not before year 4

• Growth, change and the changing adolescent body. This topic should include the human lifecycle
• Puberty should be mentioned as a stage in this process, including the key facts about the menstrual cycle, including physical and emotional changes

Not before year 5

• Sex education topics taught in primary, which should be in line with what pupils learn about conception and birth as part of the national curriculum for science

Not before year 7

• What constitutes harmful sexual behaviour, including sexual harassment and the concepts and laws relating to it, including revenge porn, upskirting and taking intimate sexual photos without consent, public sexual harassment, and unsolicited sexual language / attention / touching
• The concepts and laws relating to sexual exploitation and abuse, grooming, stalking, and forced marriage
• Circulating images and information and how to safely report to trusted adults the non-consensual creation or distribution of an intimate image
• The risks of inappropriate online content, including pornographic content, without discussing the details of sexual acts

Not before year 9

• Discussing the details of sexually explicit materials, in the context of learning about the risks of inappropriate online content, including pornographic content
• Discussing the explicit details of violent abuse, including the detail of topics such as rape, sexual assault, female genital mutilation (FGM), virginity testing and hymenoplasty
• Discussing the explicit details of violent abuse when discussing the concepts and laws relating to domestic abuse including coercive control, emotional, sexual, economic or physical abuse, and violent or threatening behaviour
• Explicit discussion of the details of sexual acts, in the context of teaching about intimate and sexual relationships, including in relation to contraception and STIs

2. Primary sex ed should draw on science

The consultation states that where primary schools teach sex education, its “purpose is not to prepare pupils for sexual activity in later life, but to focus on giving pupils the information they need to understand human reproduction and for their own safety”.
The guidance “continues to recommend that primary schools have a sex education programme, but restricts this to no earlier than years 5 or 6”.

It is also “clear that if a primary school teaches sex education, it should draw on the knowledge pupils are developing about the human life cycle, as set out in the national curriculum for science”.

3. Schools have some ‘flexibility’

Despite the large number of age restrictions, the DfE said it had still allowed schools a “degree of flexibility”.

This will allow schools to “respond promptly to issues which pose an imminent safeguarding risk to their pupils”.

“This means that in certain circumstances, schools may decide to teach age-limited topics earlier, provided it is necessary to do so in order to safeguard pupils and provided that teaching is limited to the essential facts, without going into unnecessary details.”

For example, if a primary school finds out pupils are sharing porn, it would be allowed to “address this appropriately with younger pupils without going into details of the sexual acts viewed”.

4. ‘Do not teach about gender identity’

The guidance states that pupils should be “taught the law” about gender re-assignment, and “be clear” that individuals must be 18 “before they can legally reassign their gender”.
Schools “should not teach about the broader concept of gender identity”, which the DfE said was “a highly contested and complex subject”.

The guidance described gender identity as “a sense a person may have of their own gender, whether male, female or a number of other categories”.

“This may or may not be the same as their biological sex. Many people do not consider that they or others have a separate gender identity.”

5. ‘Teach the facts about biological sex’

If asked about the topic of gender identity, schools should “teach the facts about biological sex and not use any materials that present contested views as fact, including the view that gender is a spectrum”.

Material suggesting that someone’s gender is determined by their interests or clothing choices “should not be used as it risks leading pupils who do not comply with sex stereotypes to question their gender when they might not have done so otherwise”.

Where schools decide to use external resources, “they should avoid materials that use cartoons or diagrams that oversimplify this complex concept or that could be interpreted as being aimed at younger children”.

Schools should also “consult parents on the content of external resources on this topic in advance and make all materials available to them on request”.

6. Share materials with parents

The consultation states that the draft guidance is “clear” there is a “strong public interest in parents being able to see all materials used to teach RSHE, if they would like to”.

Schools “should not agree to contractual restrictions which prevent this”, and existing clauses are “void”, given the “public interest” in parents being able to see material.

But schools must comply with copyright law when sharing materials. It is “best practice to share materials via a ‘parent portal’ or, if this is not possible, through a presentation”.

7. New content on sexual harassment…

The government has added a new section to the guidance on “addressing prejudice, harassment and sexual violence and harmful sexual behaviours”.

This is in light of evidence of the “prevalence of sexual harassment in some schools”.

New content addresses “harmful behaviours that pupils may be exposed to, including online, which may normalise harmful or violent sexual behaviours – for example, by giving pupils the opportunity to identify positive male role models”.

There is also new content about sexual harassment and sexual violence, including about fixated and obsessive behaviours, such as stalking.

8. …and on suicide prevention

The government has also added a section on suicide prevention, which explains that “in teaching about mental health and wellbeing within the RSHE curriculum, schools may wish to talk to young people about the prevention of suicide, including how to identify warning signs and where and how to seek help”.

“The guidance says that if addressing suicide directly, teaching should focus on equipping pupils to recognise when they, or someone they know, needs support and where they can seek help if they have concerns.”

Given the sensitivity and complexity of content on suicide prevention, “direct references to suicide should not be made before year 8”.

9. A ‘number of additional’ topics

The DfE has also added a number of “additional” topics that schools will have to teach about in the RSHE curriculum. These include..,

• Loneliness
• New content on gambling
• Prevalence of ‘deepfakes’
• Antimicrobial resistance
• Healthy behaviours during pregnancy
• Illegal online behaviours including drug and knife supply
• Personal safety, including road, railway and water safety
• Vaping,
• Menstrual and gynaecological health including endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), heavy menstrual bleeding
• Parenting and early years brain development
• Virginity testing and hymenoplasty
• Bereavement

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/new-sex-education-guidance-proposals-what-schools-need-to-know/

I think that posters arguing that primary children should be being taught about porn should provide some sample materials about what they mean by that? Precisely what do you think teachers should tell 8 /9 10 year olds about porn? What language should they use? What practices? What visuals / images would you use?

Because I can tell you that exposing children to age inappropriate information (as I think someone's explained upthread) is abusive in itself. And before we get the usual "this didn't happen, it's a conspiracy theory from right wing bigots" nonsense, this thread details how Warwickshie Council had to backtrack when they allowed a man to create materials for school children that were deeply sexually inappropriate. The council initially defended it - until people exposed precisely the extreme porn that was being "sold" to children as acceptable:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3795892--All-about-me-Sex-Relationships-primary-education

This x 1,000

So before we even get to whether the research leading to these statistics is valid... you're saying that because 1 in 10 pupils see porn by age 9, the other 90% should be exposed to it too?

I'm pretty sure the 90% of parents ensuring their children aren't in the 10% aren't going to be very keen on this idea.

This sort of statistic means that there will be many classes where none of the children have been exposed. Why introduce it to them?

Not sure if you thought my comments were aimed at you but they weren't. Just generally often because I too am new / uninformed on a topic and worry they my pulling out paragraphs from a longer article may distort what is being reported.

What's strange is that the 2nd largest group of signatories is women's groups in the VAWG sector.

And even allowing that some are genuinely well qualified to work with and provide support to women who have suffered male violence, not sure how qualified they are to comment on this.

They may have accummulated anecdotal information about how what is happening in schools, but they aren't experts in education.

Added to which I haven't seen any of these groups for instance ever having asked for feedback from service users about what is or is not taught in RSHE being part of the problem of male violence, rather than what is happening in pupils homes and community.

I suppose part of me is worried that they have signed this as much to show support for the teaching of gender identity!

• The End Violence Against Women Coalition
• Refuge
• Women’s Aid Federation of England (Women’s Aid)
• Rape Crisis England & Wales
• Everyone’s Invited
• Action Breaks Silence
• Advance
• Birmingham and Solihull Women’s Aid
• Bold Voices
• Beyond Equality
• FORWARD
• Imkaan
• IKWRO – Women’s Rights Organisation
• IRISi
• Jewish Women’s Aid
• Juno Women’s Aid
• Kindling Transformative Interventions
• Latin American Women’s Aid
• Latin American Women’s Rights Service (LAWRS)
• LMK Let Me Know
• Middle Eastern Women and Society Organisation (MEWSO)
• Our Streets Now
• Rights of Women
• Solace Women’s Aid
• Surviving Economic Abuse
• Survivors Of Abuse
• Tender
• This Ends Now
• Violence Against Women and Girls Research Network
• Woman’s Trust
• Women’s Budget Group
• Roj Women’s Association
• White ribbon UK
• Agenda Alliance
• Standing Together
• Respect
• Savana

These organisations represent their own agendas, but where is the power of parents? As a progressive radical parent who has always been forthright in speaking to my children about any of the issues PHSE covers, I can honestly say that all the grossly inappropriate experiences we have faced have come from school. My eldest D was exposed to pornographic content on YouTube accidentally through an unsecured computer in a lesson in year 4 (really!). The extremely well known secondary school they both attend refused to share RHSE content with me for 4 years, and finally said this was because they are following the advice of the local authority to
not engage in this with parents. Since the former govt took action on this, they have complied and share the curriculum but not lesson content. I have asked for this because both my daughters have come home utterly indoctrinated. The info shared in the parent consultation (statutory) had several serious and ideologically driven mistakes. We have parent activists on the governors who are connected to at least two of the charities listed and who are open about their ideological commitments. The school is excellent but honestly the harm that we have experienced just through PHSE/RHSE alone is something I can never forgive.
These organisations perhaps include people who mean well, but they have no idea of the impact on children of consistently and insidiously invading boundaries. The ultimate effect is that girls like mine are less able to recognise harm and to protect themselves, because they have been taught by teachers they respect that everything is normal and all that matters is consent.
I have seen teacher after teacher prioritise their own values and happiness over what any caring parent considers sensible and basic. I mean for example, sharing content on sensitive topics in RHSE/PHSE with all families, and recognising the difference between what is fact based and what is politically and ideologically driven.
Absoluetly every complaint I have ever made has been upheld by the Head Teacher, so I am not coming from an extreme or vexatious place. But honestly it’s exhausting and I’ve had enough.
i am not a social conservative, but I am a feminist and a mum. Also, I know when I smell a rat or if I see what looks like grooming of children to lower their boundaries.

You think the schools are going to show kids porn in lessons?? 😱
That's a bit extreme. I think teachers at primary school should explain what it is in an age appropriate way and tell children what to do if they see anything that makes them uncomfortable.

I hate how normalised pornography has become over the past couple decades and I worry that anything being taught in schools isn't and won't be enough. If the government - this one or the previous - really cared about this issue they'd legislate to severely restrict access to it like some US states have.

I think this is really what I wanted to say about these stray groups thinking they can say what should or should not happen.

Where is the voice for parents?

Professional campaigners can totally derail consultations that are aimed at giving individuals a voice.

Gender ideology is a nonsense and is only here due to the GRA

Get rid of all of it and teach children they can be or do anything but their sex cannot change.

On the guidelines yes to limiting damage from adults committed to gender ideology

Professional campaigners can totally derail consultations that are aimed at giving individuals a voice.

Although to be fair to the Tories, they didn't fall for it re the GRA.

Not sure Labour would choose to look at it this way.

They aren't qualified. This is not their area. As you say, they might have some views based on their experiences with those they work with but that's it.

This is, however, an area that should not be given over to ideology or a system of belief(s) - as we know.

Being feminist is a form of a belief. We cannot replace one scope creep with another. This must be about what is age appropriate, and best for children.

Not what is best for the VAWG sector, or any other sector. But what's best for children.

This feels like the EHRC and their creeping into "balancing rights". Great. But we are dealing with the safeguarding of children here. That must always be first and foremost. "Balancing rights" is how you end up with a certain male teacher pushing guidance in schools. Enthusiastically taken up, this kind of adult thinking about what adults want has created the conditions for mixed sex toilets, alleged rapes awaiting trial, and daily indignity for girls.

Could VAW be worried about family member sexual abuse of a young child, meaning the child needs to know it is being perpetrated on them even if it is before the suggested appropriate age?

This is from,
Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation Analysis Launched
news.npcc.police.uk/releases/vkpp-launch-national-analysis-of-police-recorded-child-sexual-abuse-and-exploitation-csae-crimes-report-2022

• There were around 107,000 offences reported in 2022 – a 7.6% increase compared to 2021, nearly quadruple what it is was 10 years ago. Evidence continues to suggest many crimes remains unreported.
• Around 75% of CSAE offences related to sexual offences committed directly against children, andaround 25% relate to online offences of Indecent Images of Children.
• The crime types regarding CSAE are changing. For example, historically Child-on-Child abuse accounted for around third of offences. The data in the report suggests that today this is just over half.
• CSAE within the family environment remains acommon form of reported abuse, accounting for an estimated 33% of reported contact CSAE crime. Parents and siblings were the two most common relationships featuring.
• Group-based CSAE accounts for 5% of all identified and reported CSAE ranging from unorganised peer group sharing of imagery, to more organised complex high harm cases with high community impact.
• Reported CSAE is heavily gendered, as expected, with males (82% of all CSAE perpetrators) predominantly abusing females (79% of victims). Sexual offending involving male victims are more common in offences involving indecent images and younger children.
• The number of recorded incidents of Online Sexual Abuse continues to grow. It accounts for at least 32% of CSAE.
• 52% of all CSAE cases involved reports of children (aged 10 to 17) offending against other children with 14 being the most common age. This is a growing and concerning trend involving a wide range of offending. Whilst some include exploratory online sexual behaviours, some of the most prevalent forms include serious sexual assaults, including rape

Great post, and this is what I and most parents I talk to about this think.

Parents are fed up with the 'rights' driven agenda (as well as nonsensical unscientific gender ideology) in schools pushed by organisations such as those listed and some teachers which is completely inappropriate for children and overrides - in many cases - safeguarding law and practice.

They're tired of having to complain and have their complaint upheld - I've had to do this twice in the last two months. A lot of parents don't have time. I was right in both cases - upheld by headteacher, but we just want RSE / PHSE to be safeguarding driven in the first place, not have to pick up the pieces all the time.

IMO it's entirely inappropriate to introduce the concept of porn to pre-pubescent children. They have no frame of reference for it and it's developmentally inappropriate. Who decides what porn is anyway? Some would say the practices of the school of sexuality education (getting kids to draw dick pics) veer very close. Are they the RSE provider that had people working there who also ran a business selling sex toys, or am I thinking of a different RSE provider?

And yes, all resources including lesson plans should be shared in their entirety. Of my children's schools, one school has done this now, the other still getting there. If they care about children's wellbeing, why on earth would they make it more difficult for parents to safeguard their children? Sharing resources so parents can have meaningful discussions is part of that.

Given this data the free and easy 'anything goes' style of RSE parents have been appalled at in recent years doesn't seem to be working does it? Look at the rates of child on child offending. Maybe introducing them to the concept of porn early on isn't working, or is indeed part of the problem fuelling this increase, and they should just ban smartphones for kids instead.

Could VAW be worried about family member sexual abuse of a young child, meaning the child needs to know it is being perpetrated on them even if it is before the suggested appropriate age?

I am sure it could well be, but this would imply that everyone thinks schools should take on the responsibility of being the support service for children.

Obviously, really, really important that children feel safe at school and can reply on teachers.

But can society expect teachers to pick up all the problems that are wider societal problems.

So rather than women's groups tagging themselves along with some mixed bag of other groups, wouldn't it be better to talk about what would be helpful for the women they provide services for, which might include schools but surely so much more.

ie why not build on the base that is meant to be their purpose for existing.

Through consulting with their users they might come up with something much better than cobbling on to teachers responsibiliies some generic all purpose lessons.

(Does anyone know what the impact of these lessons are on children, and for instance in do they ever have sessions just for girls and for boys. What boys need to learn and understand about sexual violence as the potential primary perpetrators isn't the same of what girls need to learn and find out how to protect themselves.)

Does anyone know what the impact of these lessons are on children

They can be traumatising for children who are victims of child sexual abuse, yes. The quite well written 2020 non-statutory guidance recognised this - and it recognised the impact on teachers who were victims. That is exactly the kind of care and attention that needs to be paid to these sorts of topics in my view.

Eh? A load of the RHSE is teaching about respectful relationships, unhealthy relationships, domestic violence and domestic abuse. Those organisations are experts in that. And teenagers need it. Otherwise they learn about relationships from porn and tiktok. Andrew Tate style.

That list of organisations is yet another depressing example of how safeguarding children gets deprioritised when the queer theorists and trans lobbyists demand to be prioritised. It just shows how immensely powerful these male dominated organisations are that they can threaten a consultation about SRE in schools that prioritises child safety. And as for the captured VAWG groups - words fail me.

Children's safety always comes last.

🙈
In what sense is getting children to draw the reproductive system like porn??

This place is mad...