UK: Primary pupils could be given sex lessons ("...children as young as seven or even five...")

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | February 25, 2008 | Graeme Paton

[Stoat]

Primary pupils could be given sex lessons

By Graeme Paton, Education Editor
 

Last Updated: 3:37am GMT 26/02/2008

 

 

Compulsory sex education lessons could be introduced in primary schools, the schools minister said yesterday.

Jim Knight confirmed that the Government was reviewing its rules on the age at which children were given sex and relationship education - as well as the content of classes.

It will also consider introducing single-sex lessons in the subject for the first time. Mr Knight admitted that many sex education classes were "not up to scratch".

Britain has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in western Europe. More than 20 schoolgirls become pregnant in England every day, and under-age pregnancies rose by four per cent to 7,462 in 2005.

Under present laws, the biological facts about sex must be taught in science lessons to all pupils aged 11 to 14.

Primary schools are not obliged to explore the wider issues of relationships and social education, although children should recognise parts of the body and appreciate that "humans can produce offspring and these grow into adults" as part of the science curriculum, according to Government guidance.

Some aspects of sex can also be taught as part of personal, social and health education (PSHE) lessons at all ages but they are not compulsory and parents can ask for their children to be withdrawn.

The Department for Children, Schools and Families said yesterday that it would review existing legislation, including "the right age to begin teaching" sex and relationship education (SRE).

This raises the prospect that children as young as seven or even five may be given compulsory lessons for the first time.

Mr Knight said: "This review is a direct response to concerns raised by young people. We know that SRE is good in most schools but we know from talking to young people that in some schools SRE teaching is not up to scratch. This is not acceptable.

"I want to look at what the best schools are doing and make sure every school follows their lead."

The review will also investigate when and whether schools should refer children to sexual heath clinics.

A spokesman for the Christian Institute, a lobby group, said: "Sex education has been disastrous for many years. It hasn't reduced teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases have gone through the roof.

"If this was the private sector, this strategy would have been abandoned long ago."

[Stoat]

Please also see:

Sex education could be made compulsory for five-year-olds the Daily Mail

"Panel members include representatives from the Family Planning Association, Brook Advisory Centres, HIV charity the Terrence Higgins Trust and the Sex Education Forum.

Critics warned that the review is an attempt to introduce by stealth a more explicit sex education programme for young children.

They fear the panel will rubber-stamp an official report from Government advisers in 2006 which said sex education lessons should on the curriculum in all primary schools. "

[Stoat]

Ping

[informavoracious]

Exposing younger and younger students to sex education will do nothing to solve the situation. It only piques their interest and reinforces that everything is about sex, sex, sex. What happened to Freud's "latency period"? Can't we just let little kids be little kids?

I challenge anyone to present a pregnant teen girl who doesn't know where babies come from, or how she got pregnant. The problem is not a lack of knowledge about sex but apathy and a lack of morals and proper perspective. Young single women continue to get pregnant not because they don't know about contraception, but because they are beyond caring what happens to them.

[Vanders9]

Absolutely correct! Excellent outline.

[Vanders9]

I thought that the UK government had given up on Sex Education on the grounds that the kids of today knew more than the teachers did anyway...

[Stoat]

Can't we just let little kids be little kids?

I would suggest that this is not going to be viewed as a valid option when the only possible solutions are viewed as being Government Solutions.  "Leaving kids alone" does not serve to increase the breadth, scope and power of Government, nor does it enrich Government officials; quite the contrary.

The problem is not a lack of knowledge about sex but apathy and a lack of morals and proper perspective.

From the Telegraph article:

Primary schools are not obliged to explore the wider issues of relationships and social education,...

Well, there you go.

How is this handled here in the USA?  I keep hearing stories about graphic homosexuality being taught to very young children .......

[Zeon Cowboy]

Hahaha, this headline.

They "could be given sex lessons." Like, they're going to teach them how to have sex! What a hilariously poor choice of words.

[Stoat]

Our British Friends occasionally utilize a slightly different style of speaking, which we Yanks will sometimes misinterpret  :-)

 

[informavoracious]

Oh, things are no better here. How it is handled in the U.S. varies from state to state, school district to school district. Our kids went to what was, at the time, a still-orthodox Catholic school (which has since gone liberal). We live in [cough-cough] Kalifornia, where Governor Schwarzenegger recently signed bill SB777. It bans anything in public schools that could be determined to reflect adversely toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices. Phrases such as "Mom and Dad" will now be seen as discriminatory if a same sex couple is not also included. Arnold should have stuck to acting.

Our kids are married now and we are hoping they will homeschool when the time comes.

[Stoat]

and other alternative lifestyle choices.

So I would imagine that the barnyard gates are pretty much wide open now, or will soon be.

I guess Arnold knows he had better abide by the hard-left playbook, or he'll be sleeping on the couch for the next fifty years.

"sigh"

Our kids are married now and we are hoping they will homeschool when the time comes.
 

I hope that your dreams will be realized.  I graduated high school in the 1970's, at a time when homeschooling was still illegal.  Public school then was absolutely awful, and I gather it's gotten a whole lot worse since then.  Hopefully your kids will take advantage of the tremendous opportunity that so many millions of us were denied.

[Stoat]

I thought that the UK government had given up on Sex Education on the grounds that the kids of today knew more than the teachers did anyway...

From the Daily Mail article:

"Schools Minister Jim Knight said: "This review is a direct response to concerns raised by young people.

"We know SRE is good in most schools, but we know from talking to young people that in some schools the teaching is not up to scratch. This is not acceptable. "

Translation:  'We discovered that young people are quite interested in, and motivated by, sex and related topics.  Who are we to say "No" to future voters?'

[Zeon Cowboy]

Oh, yeah. British thing. Didn’t even think of that... *smacks forehead*

[markomalley]

((shakes head))

I wonder why this type of thing doesn’t even shock or surprise me anymore...

((shakes head again))

[grey_whiskers]

Like, *PING*, folks.

Jobs in UK for the naughty teachers?

[wintertime]

ping

[sapper1975]

John Cleese and the Pythons covered this years ago.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=uDoQFcQEpOQ