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?

I'm not making any personal accusations, unlike you. Characterise me how you like; it's clearly a smear designed to put me or others who share my POV off posting.

I'm happy to hear how schools/ SSA assess "high quality RHSE". Part of the whole issue I think is there is too much debate around specific material and arbitrary age limits, and not enough around the principles of quality RHSE. And just saying "boundaries" doesn't cut it, because everybody's boundaries are different so it's not an objective criterion.

@MrsOvertonsWindow maybe with your knowledge of how schools work you can explain how schools would address the above topics without potentially breaching your safeguarding/boundary standards? SSA didn't answer the question, maybe you can.

My posts are accurate - I haven't made anything up, merely cited things that you've said which I don't believe is a smaer.

It's an interesting view to think there is too much debate around SRE materials & age limits. Part of the problem has been (and I believe we agree on this) that random organisations have been producing materials for SRE in the absence of clear guidelines for schools that are sometimes age inappropriate and thus incompatible with safeguarding.

Being able to name these issues and discuss them is critical, Parents have these debates on a daily basis about all sorts: "What age can he go to the shops alone, travel on public transport alone, stay home alone etc ? Suggesting that they shouldn't discuss "When should he learn about porn, how should this happen, what should be said? who's best placed to discuss this with him"? seems to me to be disempowering parents.

Boundaries are critical for children and society. Safeguarding is about assessing risk objectively and while individuals may have different approaches to boundaries, society has established very clear legal boundaries that must not be crossed. Age related boundaries that are legally enforced and boundaries about social acceptability and keeping individuals safe. These are enshrined in our laws and people who transgress boundaries punished.

Understanding and respecting boundaries seems to me to be a cornerstone of a safe democratic society that keeps all its citizens safe - especially children and the vulnerable.

You are portraying things I've said in an extremely negative manner, and conflating points from several threads with your own interpretation to make me look bad. It's not conducive to discussion and I can only assume its yet another attempt to shut me down and try to get me off the board because my questions are inconvenient.

Please can you explain to me what a "good quality" RHSE lesson teaching teenage girls about coercive control and sexual abuse in the context of a relationship would look like? What materials would it include? What topics would be discussed?

I think your questions grossly mischaracterise SSA's approach which is far more informed, nuanced and positive about SRE in schools than your questions imply.

But taking the questions in good faith - these are superficial responses to an immensely complex issue.:

Sex ed is teaching about an intimate personal aspect of life in a formal school setting to groups of children. Each age group will already contain children with a massive range of life experiences, abilities, differences etc. So pitching the content / differentiating a lesson is already a challenge. Let alone all the adults being comfortable with the material, ensuring that religious and other sensitivities are acknowledged and that children feel safe when discussing SRE.

We all differ in our levels of emotional resilience and discussing sex, our bodies, changes, how we react sexually can be challenging - for many adults let alone children. This plays out in the classroom as well and is massively influenced by levels of maturity and life experiences. Children should never be compelled to participate in age inappropriate discussions & activities in SRE. It's why the age boundary discussions are so important.

There's some fantastic work and materials around healthy relationships and consent being done both in schools and outside school settings. But teaching isn't as simple as "pouring in the knowledge & information" and out comes the informed child. Children absorb information and knowledge in different ways and at different times. Teachers (and parents) understand this when they realise their words of wisdom have been ignored! Your questions seem to imply that schools can easily teach girls not to involved in a coercive, controlling or abusive relationship? Surely a quick look at the relationships board suggests that this is a massively complex issue that SRE lessons in a school won't "cure"

I think people see schools as a respository for the ills of society. "Just teach them to spot an abuser and say no. Just tell them and they'll understand"

In my experience, what really influences children's learning, social development and behaviour is where school is a safe place where children know that their views are listened to and respected. Where children know how to get help. And I'd see SRE as a small part of that child centred approach.

At what age do children need to know about abusive relationships? How do we empower children to seek help when they're being abused without suggesting to all children that they're surrounded by potential sexual abusers? What are the skills to avoid abusive relationships? If it's that easy to teach then this would have been sorted years ago.

There's no easy answers to any of this. But I am clear that children are safer because of organisations like SSA who have diligently challenged some of the grim materials being produced for schools and are making us all reflect on how we teach SRE safely. We should all be grateful for their efforts.

Now you've made me regret taking your questions seriously and giving such an extensive response.. 😂

I appreciate the response.
If I can summarise, it appears to be very complicated. My assumption therefore is its much easier to criticise RHSE than it is to define good RHSE.

It must be very hard for teachers to risk being called "groomers" if their lessons aren't perfect, whilst operating in a context of uncertainty because the boundaries and methods for teaching are unclear.

Take the example of anal sex. Research has shown that teenagers expect to try this, despite neither sex really enjoying it. And that teenage girls and young women are suffering increasing rates of colorectal injuries as a result, meaning this is a public health issue.

How can society tackle this without educators being perceived to be "grooming children"?

Just like to intrude and get back to the OP which is very much me trying to work this out because there are so many elements to it.

ie even is there was an agreed curriculum we are all aware that now more than every children are subject to any number of other influences ie IRL friendship groups / gangs, virtual world.

So assuming it was assumed that schools (just for convenience rather than appropriateness) were the places where these lessons took place, what mechanism is there for parents to be actively part of setting lesson content, and how would disagreements over age appropriate material etc., be settled? Is there any other example of partnership working like this.

At the moment if it is that the Government is setting guidelines I can see how some schools would not think that parents need to be consulted.

Let alone those who hijack the basic platform to then promote their personal agenda.

Why should parents be directly involved in RHSE teaching as opposed to any other type of teaching?
I am concerned it sets a dangerous precedent if parents can directly influence a schools curriculum. I can see that model opening the door to extreme faith based school agendas, creationism etc.
Far better for parents to lobby the government on a common set of principles/curriculum for the schools to follow.

I keep saying it but central oversight of providers would be good too. That's a better way to address issues than random age ratings and individual parents expecting to have the final say.

There are countless groups - not all of them parents - wanting to influence what's taught in schools and schools quite rightly aim to prioritise professional expertise rather than individual parents on a mission, from determining what is taught to children. A parent with particular religious views shouldn't be able to dictate what's taught to other children although they do have the right to remove their child from sex ed if they wish. We then get into the issue of the child's rights to knowledge - which is why sex ed is delivered via Science - statutory, no right of parents to withdraw their child and focused on facts, science and accuracy with the relationship aspects taught via SRE.

There's a baseline of information that children are entitled to and this should be professionally decided. Parents should be informed and consulted - but not necessarily be able to veto professional opinion.

That's why when queer theory lobbyists & the porn industry saw influencing SRE as a quick win in grooming children to lower their boundaries in terms of sexual behaviour, changing sex etc it was disastrous for children. The last government & especially the DfE hold a massive responsibility for failing to identify predatory values and for being "bought" by lobbyists promoting queer theory and ignoring society's duty to safeguard children.

The current guidelines need far more detail and the consultation is an important step in gaining consensus and allowing parents to contribute about what age appropriate looks like. Far too many of us have been alarmed at seeing people who on any scale would be deemed unsuitable to work with children, being allowed to weigh in on SRE in schools. It's time their influence was removed.

This is the thoughtful response from Transgender Trend to the consultation that highlights the alarm that so many parents have felt when they've seen some of the materials being used with children - again most coming from individual activist groups:

www.transgendertrend.com/rshe-draft-statutory-schools-guidance-submission/

the consultation that highlights the alarm that so many parents have felt when they've seen some of the materials being used with children

But that is the point. Parents dont know.

This isn't like being taught maths ie it isn't just about "sex" being taught as biology, this involves "relationships".

Why are teachers teaching this? What are they basing what is being taught on?

It would be the same, though maybe not as bad, as having someone teach that because you are a boy you will like this and if you are a girl you will like that.

Why I mentioned parents was is there a way of reaching a base line that says yes this is what schools can teach as "fact" but other areas aren't anything to with schools.

I am not saying this because I think parents are always right, as we know many, many children whose parents are their oppressor.

There has been a base line for much SRE teaching. The Conservatives got rid of lots of guidance (bonfire of red tape for schools) and then, when schools asked for advice, the DfE openly promoted self invested lobby groups like Stonewall, Mermaids, Gendered intelligence, GIRES and other groups to school. They've rolled back a bit on this - Mermaids are no longer cited after their paedophile scandal - but having told schools these were "experts', they'd opened the door with some schools (not all) assuming that the due diligence had already happened at the DfE.

The Science curriculum is fact - but worryingly there are some science teachers telling children they can change sex and TWAW etc. I really believe that had the last government exercised due diligence and reined in the activists in the DfE we may not be in this mess. But with at least 10 secretaries of state for Education, consistency and responsibility were low on their agenda.

Sex and relationships is also discussed in humanities- with ethics and RE. Which is right I think. Conversations about misogyny, unhealthy relationships etc aren't really suitable for science.

Glad to see you acknowledging that the Conservative approach of getting rid of guidance and introducing the third sector in the "big society" approach contributed to this situation.

I see SSA as an organisation very akin to those other orgs in that it's a grassroots lobby group, rather than science and evidence led.