RSHE: Who decides? Schools? Parents? Government? Is there a collaborative way to resolve competing rights?

[IwantToRetire]

There have been a number of different threads on this with the guidelines issued earlier this year by Tory Government https://www.gov.uk/government/news/age-limits-introduced-to-protect-children-in-rshe

And their now closed consultation https://consult.education.gov.uk/rshe-team/review-of-the-rshe-statutory-guidance/

On the day it closed 100 groups called for the consultation to be abandoned on the grounds it was rushed and based on political positions not children’s interest https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5117718-100-organisations-ask-labour-to-abandon-tory-revised-guidelines-on-rshe

How can this be resolved so that the primary aim of helping children as they move towards adulthood is achieved, but no at the expense of the right of parents to be equally important in that process?

The antifeminist bit is claiming that shame around masturbation is a myth and that young people can be relied upon to discover their own bodies in private.

We know young women experience societal pressure to be ashamed of their bodies; that female genitalia are seem as dirty, complicated and unreliable and that sexual pleasure is presented as the domain of the man. This is compounded at the moment by streaming porn focussed on acts that are painful and degrading for women. There's loads of research about this. It's all being overlooked by the author who is busy building a strawman that the original article is teaching the "specifics of masturbation" or "extensively teaching" masturbation.

I find the original article that SSA were critiquing a bit OTT in terms of sex positivity but if you actually boil it down what the author was saying was in sex education it should made clear that masturbation is healthy, not harmful, and that learning about your own body and what you find pleasurable will help sex be more fun later. I don't think this is controversial.

Unfortunately it's starting to come across to me like SSA just want sex education banned altogether.

Could you point to anything we have ever said that indicates we want sex education banned? Good quality sex education is an essential element of safeguarding. We see very little good quality sex education.

I don't mean to sound rude, but you are a grassroots volunteer organisation and so I'm interested why you feel qualified to define what "good quality" sex education is? You'd need to start with what the purpose of sex education is and how you measure "quality", which is subjective.

This one
https://www.google.com/amp/s/safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2023/02/05/the-school-of-sexuality-education/amp/

When you read the research paper about the purpose of the play doh vulvas and the felt tips it is not at all as you have portrayed it. It's about giving teenagers a way into some quite difficult topics around sexual assault and harassment. It's not about adults lecturing children about how to make a vulva.

Don't forget you said it ignored "loads of feminism" as though that's a considered, serious, or relevant point

You clearly did not read the article on play doh genitals properly @CassieMaddox. We had significant contributions from a RSE teacher and we consulted with survivors of CSA.

As for our credentials, our group includes health, education and safeguarding professionals. We have been called upon to give evidence to WESC.

Can I ask what your experience is in safeguarding?

I read the original research paper and agreed with its findings.

Even your photo is misleading. Children drawing with chalk on a path, primary age, accompanying an article about a topic being taught to older teenagers.

I'm not sure why you've switched from campaigning about gender ideology in schools to campaigning (without much clarity) about RHSE.

What would "high quality" sex education look like? What are you campaigning for exactly?

Oh, regarding your question I'm a mother and a protector of women's rights. I also know how to critique a research article and how to spot over stated arguments and false equivalences.

Edited to add: and a CSA survivor myself and better RHSE at school would have definitely helped me. Not that my experiences count as they don't fit the narrative.

You seem to think you know a lot about us for someone who "hasn't looked into us much."

We constantly say throughout all of our resources that good quality sex education is essential for safeguarding.

This blog post sums up what good quality looks like.

https://merchedcymru.wales/2022/03/10/safeguarding-needs-strong-boundaries/?fbclid=IwAR30-rb2tkyV3kTeXXfdmcyCLMzKqUCovDNqhYzj2NDayW7VmG8JJj5EY

And this transcript also helpful:
https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2022/03/21/child-q-safeguarding-and-sex-education/

And just to offer some clarity, our aims and who we are are clearly stated on our website. They have not changed since we launched 5 years ago.

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/who-we-are/

OK, so have I understood this right? You are advocating teaching the facts about sex and contraception, including acknowledgement that some religions think contraception is a sin. And that teachers must check the content for any instances of "boundary crossing" or potential to trigger students who may have been abused.

Does it therefore follow that discussion of sex as part of a relationship (I.e. more than the pure mechanics) is not something you believe should be covered in school?

How does your approach safeguard teenage girls from inadvertently getting involved in a coercive, controlling or abusive relationship?

How should schools educate children about healthy relationships and coercive control without discussing sex and boundaries?

We know coercive control and abuse is an issue in teenage relationships; we know without intervention, people who have been in an abusive relationship (as abuser or victim) are likely to repeat that experience throughout their lives.

To me, it's not "safeguarding" to avoid teaching children the skills they need to recognise abusive relationships. And I can't see how a school could teach that in a way that complies with your guidelines.

Always accusations. Never solutions.

Hnestly Cassie, you are a good example of why I don't want teachers teaching my kids anything about sexual health. An utter inability to understand boundaries, why not everyone believes exactly the same things about sex, much less why people have certain beliefs or how they fit into a larger worldview.

That, and the deep belief that that state has every right to decide what kids should know and believe.

I agree. And I think everyone's spent more than enough of their time explaining things to that poster now. All we get back is strops and a refusal to reflect. It is the definition of pointless.

Unfair. I've given multiple solutions actually.

Well I'd say the same back to you.

Like I said. Refusal to reflect. Reflection is a core part of safeguarding. Go figure.

I haven’t engaged again here as I felt like it was a bit futile after the last thread, but for @2fallsfromSSA (in case you haven’t seen it already) the previous thread is here:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5117718-100-organisations-ask-labour-to-abandon-tory-revised-guidelines-on-rshe

And I think it’s fair to say most people disagreed with Cassie.

edit for typo

Thank you @2fallsfromSSA for coming onto this thread to defend SSA. Most women on here fully appreciate the organisation and are relieved that it's in existence. This is such an interesting thread and yet again it's disappointing to see the same poster with a history (evidenced on Advanced search) of alleging that women are "pearl clutching", right wing, conspiracy theorists" and worse for discussing safeguarding children and age appropriate boundaries with SRE.

Going back to the thread - it's worth remembering that working in partnership with parents is enshrined in our legislation and until very recently schools worked hard to work to foster partnership with parents and to involve children in school life and appropriate decisions. It's only since the onset of extreme transactivism that the "parents as bigots" along with a contemptuous approach to allowing women and children to voice opinions has developed.

So yes it must be a genuine partnership between schools and parents - the wellbeing of children is far too important and the adults who try to disrupt that alliance need to be shown the door. Few of them are parents and very few centre children's best interests, let alone safeguarding.

Maybe I'm being naive but I don't see the problem with a sex education curriculum informing students about masturbation at an age appropriate level, like year 10 or 11.

It was a long time ago now but I remember it being mentioned in sex education lessons when I was at school. Our history teacher did these classes and she was very straightforward about everything, no shame involved, just told us straight facts. Answered all our questions even the cheeky ones! Meanwhile our form teacher was standing in the corner going bright red, bless him.

Hyperbole much? It isn't down to me that certain posters regurgitate conspiracy theories like students using litter trays. And it's not good etiquette to drag that across threads to misrepresent me.

I was answering the points raised directly to me by SSA. I have concerns about how they position some of their messaging.

Thank you @2fallsfromSSA. Unlike so many other organisations, you understand and explain and defend safeguarding. Including at that WESC where so many MPs could not bring themselves to admit they'd got things very very wrong, and that they should reflect and change.

I very much doubt the NSPCC, IWF, Barnardo's, RCEW, EVAW, Refuge, or any of the others on that letter including the unions would come here. In fact I clearly remember the NSPCC running away from mumsnet. For shame.

@TempestTost "I know it's very much going against the grain or the last decades to say schools should just stay out of those kinds of questions, but I don't see a plausible better solution."
I think I probably agree.
On OP's last thread there were various questions about what an age appropriate explanation of pornography could be for children aged 9 or 10 years old. It set me to thinking how I might broach that with my own child as he gets older. What will I say if someone shows him a pornographic video at that age? I was thinking about describing it like I would a snuff film: some people get very excited watching videos of other people being hurt. Maybe more of a feminist angle, I believe we've created a world in which lots of older boys and men get very excited watching videos of women being hurt inside. My immediate thought was, that's how I'd want a teacher to describe it to my year 5 child, too. But I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with a teacher saying that to my son. Of course there's the point that I'm ok while we're in agreement but will there be other areas where I find the teacher's opinions morally abhorrent? But I'm also uncomfortable with a teacher providing such intimate moral formation for a child. I don't know where that discomfort will lead but at the moment I feel that schools should, as you put it, just stay out of these kinds of questions.

Hyperbole and etiquette? 😂 There's nothing wrong is pointing out that a poster has a habit of accusing women talking about safeguarding of "pearl clutching" and other "shaming" language that is not designed to encourage respectful and open discussion.

When you challenged SSA with such confidence;
"I'm interested why you feel qualified to define what "good quality" sex education is? You'd need to start with what the purpose of sex education is and how you measure "quality", which is subjective" you actually displayed your ignorance of how schools assess and quality assure.

SSA & the rest of us involved in education know that quality is continually measured in schools including SRE. It's measured as part of whole school improvement but also by external organisations such as Ofsted via formal inspections, thematic reviews, learning walks, peer observation, pupil feedback, parent school consultation and more. Schools continually balance objective assessment with subjectivity. This doesn't mean schools have got SRE right which is the purpose of this thoughtful thread.

But as I've said before, the powerful testaments on here from some women who've been courageous enough to share their own experiences of abuse along with the knowledge that parents and professionals have of differences between children means that SRE must not be influenced by political activists seeking to impose their narrow ideological viewpoints on children but must be balanced, child centred and age appropriate.

👏