Relationship and sex education to be made compulsory in UK schools.

Nomis21

Relationship and sex education is to be made compulsory in all UK schools.

Will Ireland ever follow suit or will the stranglehold of the Catholic Church over Irish schools prevent the teaching of this important area of life in an honest and open way?

me_irl

Careful now!

bodice ripper

My mind is ****ing blown that it isn't already compulsory.

Nomis21

me_irl wrote: »

Careful now!

What should I be careful of? God's wrath?

me_irl

Lesson 1 : How to treat women.

Do the complete opposite to what Donald Trump does, says or thinks.

End Lesson.

osarusan

Ireland has the perfect video ready and waiting to be shown too.

me_irl

Nomis21 wrote: »

What should I be careful of? God's wrath?

Down with that sort of thing.

JackTaylorFan

Gonna see a lot more crazy people wanting to home-school their kids after this one. UKIP supporters, I'd imagine.

andekwarhola

I received sex education in (Irish) school. Have they stopped doing that now?

silverharp

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Gonna see a lot more crazy people wanting to home-school their kids after this one. UKIP supporters, I'd imagine.

How about Muslims , there might be some fun and games there

me_irl

silverharp wrote: »

How about Muslims , there might be some fun and games there

Why are they in to the kinky stuff?

DEFTLEFTHAND

I went to a wonderful Catholic school and we received sex ed. The RE classes ironically enough dealt with it.

This was 10 years ago.

kunst nugget

Nomis21 wrote: »

Relationship and sex education is to be made compulsory in all UK schools.

Will Ireland ever follow suit or will the stranglehold of the Catholic Church over Irish schools prevent the teaching of this important area of life in an honest and open way?

As far as I'm aware, primary and secondary schools are required to teach Relationship and Sexual Education as part of Social and Personal Health Education. Afaik, the RSE for primary schools has strict enough DoE guidelines about what is taught whereas secondary schools can apply their own guidelines which I think has seen abstinence programmes being taught in some schools.

So, RSE is compulsory here already iirc, it just needs a complete overhaul.

Hande hoche!

It's Corbyn's fault or possibly UKIP. Haven't quite decided yet.

Dr Crayfish

bodice ripper wrote: »

My mind is ****ing blown that it isn't already compulsory.

If they teach sex ed properly these kids will be getting more than their minds blown going forward

Arghus

Your mickey gets hard and then out comes the spam.

One eyed Jack

Nomis21 wrote: »

Relationship and sex education is to be made compulsory in all UK schools.

Will Ireland ever follow suit or will the stranglehold of the Catholic Church over Irish schools prevent the teaching of this important area of life in an honest and open way?

I think you've got the whole thing arseways mate tbh.

Lux23

I got sex education twenty years ago in a convent school. It was grand. Didn't realise some schools didn't do it.

The_Valeyard

Nomis21 wrote: »

Relationship and sex education is to be made compulsory in all UK schools.

Will Ireland ever follow suit or will the stranglehold of the Catholic Church over Irish schools prevent the teaching of this important area of life in an honest and open way?

Blame Catholics, bla bla bla.

When I was in school, Doctors came in and gave us a talk, had a seven week 40minute course on it.

DanielODonnell

It is actually just England schools.

I don't know much about women, I only recently found out what exactly a tampon was.

keeponhurling

I got sex education in school when I was around 12, so over 20 years ago.

Not sure if it was mandatory or not, but we in Ireland have been getting sex ed for a long time

eviltwin

Good. Sex ed should be compulsory from primary school. It should be more than just how a baby is made, it should focus on relationships, online safety, empowering kids to say no etc. I work in this area and I'm dealing on a daily basis with the fall out of inadequate sex ed and with kids seeing porn at a younger and younger age we are doing them a massive disservice not addressing this.

Lia_lia

Great news. I thought it was already compulsory over there for some reason.

We sort of had sex education. I went to a Catholic all girls convent school and did my leaving 10 years ago. In first year we had a talk with a public health nurse about getting our first period. Which was pretty weird as most of us had got our periods already. We got "goody bags" with pads and could get tampons if we got our parents to sign a form :rolleyes:.

In third year we got a talk by the same public health nurse and this time we got the tampons without having to get a form signed. We also got told about STDs, gynaecological issues (PCOS etc) and information about contraception and "how you can get pregnant". It was very good actually.

Then in 5th year religion class we got shown a bunch of propaganda pro-life videos. Was mainly interviews with women who regretted having abortions and discussing how babies that are aborted are often still breathing etc etc.. There were girls in our class that had abortions, must have been awful for them. I wonder if these videos are still shown.

tracey turnblad

I think all schools do it but you have to sign a consent form to allow your child to do it maybe it's withdrAwing the parents consent and just going to go ahead and do it

andekwarhola

Clearly the people lining up here to testify that they actually did receive sex education in Irish schools (in my case, nearly 30 years ago) are all dastardly papal agents.

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

Good. Sex ed should be compulsory from primary school. It should be more than just how a baby is made, it should focus on relationships, online safety, empowering kids to say no etc. I work in this area and I'm dealing on a daily basis with the fall out of inadequate sex ed and with kids seeing porn at a younger and younger age we are doing them a massive disservice not addressing this.

It should be up to the parents of their children though, rather than allow the parents to expect the school will educate their children with regards to relationships, sex and sexuality and so on. Parents are always complaining about the lack of it, without acknowledging that it's primarily their responsibility and shouldn't be the schools responsibility IMO.

tracey turnblad wrote: »

I think all schools do it but you have to sign a consent form to allow your child to do it maybe it's withdrAwing the parents consent and just going to go ahead and do it

That couldn't be done without violating parents constitutionally protected rights as the primary educators of their own children

Carlos Orange

me_irl wrote: »

Lesson 1 : How to treat people.

FTFY

cnoc

Nomis21 wrote: »

What should I be careful of? God's wrath?

Is Ireland supposed to copy everything that Britain does?

Cortina_MK_IV

Up until I was 18 I thought pubic hair was Bug's Bunny's cousin.

Corkgirl18

All schools in Ireland are supposed to teach it through SPHE.
I'd be very surprised to hear of a school who doesn't teach any form of it.

Our schools teach sex ed. But the content of the teaching needs an overhaul. Often only the basics are mentioned and things like STI's, consent etc aren't talked about at all.

eviltwin

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It should be up to the parents of their children though, rather than allow the parents to expect the school will educate their children with regards to relationships, sex and sexuality and so on. Parents are always complaining about the lack of it, without acknowledging that it's primarily their responsibility and shouldn't be the schools responsibility IMO.

n

Why should it be up to the parents? Parents don't always have the language to teach this stuff properly, parents don't always have the answers. There's also the embarrassment factor, not all parents are comfortable talking about sex with their kids, not all kids want to talk about sex with their parents. There needs to be a person, trained and non judgemental, to deliver this in an appropriate fashion. Kids will be more likely to open up to a stranger than a parent or a teacher.

The_Valeyard

eviltwin wrote: »

Why should it be up to the parents? Parents don't always have the language to teach this stuff properly, parents don't always have the answers. There's also the embarrassment factor, not all parents are comfortable talking about sex with their kids, not all kids want to talk about sex with their parents. There needs to be a person, trained and non judgemental, to deliver this in an appropriate fashion. Kids will be more likely to open up to a stranger than a parent or a teacher.

Under the constitution parents are primary educators so consent has to be given.

All kids should receive detailed sex Ed, but it is at the discretion of the parents as to whether the child remains in the class or not.

One eyed Jack

Corkgirl18 wrote: »

All schools in Ireland are supposed to teach it through SPHE.
I'd be very surprised to hear of a school who doesn't teach any form of it.

Our schools teach sex ed. But the content of the teaching needs an overhaul. Often only the basics are mentioned and things like STI's, consent etc aren't talked about at all.

The content of the curriculum is fine, it has to cover things in a very general way, particularly in primary schools, but many teachers are either reluctant to, or simply lack the tools themselves, to be able to deliver an adequate relationships and sex education program that would cater to the needs of students as individuals.

I know in my own child's school, he was very lucky to have a teacher where everything seemed to be on the table and up for open and frank discussion. That's incredibly rare though in my experience. A young female teacher in a Roman Catholic ethos primary school btw.

byhookorbycrook

In primary children actually seem happier to talk to their teachers, rather than a stranger. When I was in primary, there was a lady brought in when we were in 6th to do "The Talk." RSE now starts in junior infants , so by the time the children get to the senior classes, they are (mainly ) passed the snigger stage.

byhookorbycrook

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The content of the curriculum is fine, it has to cover things in a very general way, particularly in primary schools, but many teachers are either reluctant to, or simply lack the tools themselves, to be able to deliver an adequate relationships and sex education program that would cater to the needs of students as individuals.

I know in my own child's school, he was very lucky to have a teacher where everything seemed to be on the table and up for open and frank discussion. That's incredibly rare though in my experience. A young female teacher in a Roman Catholic ethos primary school btw.

Ooo er matron.

eviltwin

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Under the constitution parents are primary educators so consent has to be given.

All kids should receive detailed sex Ed, but it is at the discretion of the parents as to whether the child remains in the class or not.

That has to change. This is far too important to let parents veto it.

So what happen when people get excellent and compulsory RSE and still make poor choices, get in to and stay in abusive relationships etc. It a fantastic idea but its not going to change human nature.

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

Why should it be up to the parents?

Parents are their children's primary influencers, educators and they will still be their children's primary influence long after they have left formal education.

Parents don't always have the language to teach this stuff properly, parents don't always have the answers. There's also the embarrassment factor, not all parents are comfortable talking about sex with their kids, not all kids want to talk about sex with their parents.

Sounds like we should be giving the parents a comprehensive relationships and sex education then rather than their children. At least that way they will be better able to impart that knowledge to their children in a way, a place and a time that they as their children's parents feel is appropriate.

There needs to be a person, trained and non judgemental, to deliver this in an appropriate fashion. Kids will be more likely to open up to a strangerthan a parent or a teacher.

Isn't that half the problem? That parents are abdicating one of their primary responsibilities towards their children and foisting that responsibility upon their class teacher who has to try and deliver a generic program to another 29 children of mixed abilities and maturities?

Seems to me the issue isn't just one of a lack of comprehensive sex education, but a lack of parents willing to take their responsibilities as parents seriously.

Nomis21

Nomis21 wrote: »

Relationship and sex education is to be made compulsory in all UK schools.

Will Ireland ever follow suit or will the stranglehold of the Catholic Church over Irish schools prevent the teaching of this important area of life in an honest and open way?

kunst nugget wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, primary and secondary schools are required to teach Relationship and Sexual Education as part of Social and Personal Health Education. Afaik, the RSE for primary schools has strict enough DoE guidelines about what is taught whereas secondary schools can apply their own guidelines which I think has seen abstinence programmes being taught in some schools.

So, RSE is compulsory here already.

No, no, no. We can't have Ireland being ahead of Mother England when it comes to all things enlightened. The Irish hating, Catholic hating cultural cringers will not like that.

namloc1980

I went to a coeducational school in the 1990's and there was no sex ed at all....teenage boys and girls and no sex ed, insane when you think about it. Our knowledge of sex was based on the day one of the lads brought in his big brother's Playboy Magazine.

eviltwin

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Parents are their children's primary influencers, educators and they will still be their children's primary influence long after they have left formal education.





Sounds like we should be giving the parents a comprehensive relationships and sex education then rather than their children. At least that way they will be better able to impart that knowledge to their children in a way, a place and a time that they as their children's parents feel is appropriate.





Isn't that half the problem? That parents are abdicating one of their primary responsibilities towards their children and foisting that responsibility upon their class teacher who has to try and deliver a generic program to another 29 children of mixed abilities and maturities?

Seems to me the issue isn't just one of a lack of comprehensive sex education, but a lack of parents willing to take their responsibilities as parents seriously.

It needs to be sex ed for all, parents, kids and educators. But it still doesn't change the fact some parents won't do it. Why should a child miss out on learning about sexual health just because they have parents who won't do it.

Grayson

eviltwin wrote: »

It needs to be sex ed for all, parents, kids and educators. But it still doesn't change the fact some parents won't do it. Why should a child miss out on learning about sexual health just because they have parents who won't do it.

And parents who can't do it. If those parents never received a comprehensive sexual education they probably won't even know the knowledge they're missing.

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

It needs to be sex ed for all, parents, kids and educators. But it still doesn't change the fact some parents won't do it. Why should a child miss out on learning about sexual health just because they have parents who won't do it.

Because it's their parents right as the child's parents, to advocate and educate their children, as they see fit, not how anyone else sees fit, unless the State determines upon investigation that the individual child's overall welfare is at risk.

One eyed Jack

Grayson wrote: »

And parents who can't do it. If those parents never received a comprehensive sexual education they probably won't even know the knowledge they're missing.

Just how comprehensive then is comprehensive, according to your standards? Because I have no doubt other peoples standards for their children will differ from your own standards for your children.

I'm not going to know as much as a biomedical scientist for example. Should I have to? No, I don't think so, because they are experts in their field, and I don't need to have an comprehensive an education as they do, in the same way as they don't need as comprehensive an education in IT as I have.

In 2017 can teenagers not google these things? One would expect it's one of the few things they would have sufficient curiousity about to want to google all about it. There are no excuses now for not knowing the basics of sex education.

This debate is a pre-internet one; I heard it first in about 1988. People have their lines, and they're not updating them.

Also, all these slacker parents expecting schools to do everything in terms of their child's education, spiritual development, emotional health, well being etc is a cop out. The parents are the most important educators in a child's life.

Corkgirl18

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The content of the curriculum is fine, it has to cover things in a very general way, particularly in primary schools, but many teachers are either reluctant to, or simply lack the tools themselves, to be able to deliver an adequate relationships and sex education program that would cater to the needs of students as individuals.

I disagree. It needs serious updating. The teachers can only use the resources that are available to them and deviating from the curriculum can cause upset which means that a lot of things that should be covered aren't being covered.
Junior cycle RSE deals with physical body changes and reproduction. The implications of sexual activity is supposed to be taught in Senior Cycle. The problem is in many schools RSE stops being taught after the JC because there is no room for it on a timetable. This is way too late. Even if it is taught in Senior Cycle types of STI's/how they manifest/how you prevent them are barely mentioned.
Consent isn't focused on. Forms of contraception is skimmed over in the curriculum. Alternative sexualities is also something that needs to be covered.

One eyed Jack

Corkgirl18 wrote: »

I disagree. It needs serious updating. The teachers can only use the resources that are available to them and deviating from the curriculum can cause upset which means that a lot of things that should be covered aren't being covered.
Junior cycle RSE deals with physical body changes and reproduction. The implications of sexual activity is supposed to be taught in Senior Cycle. The problem is in many schools RSE stops being taught after the JC because there is no room for it on a timetable. This is way too late. Even if it is taught in Senior Cycle types of STI's/how they manifest/how you prevent them are barely mentioned.
Consent isn't focused on. Forms of contraception is skimmed over in the curriculum. Alternative sexualities is also something that needs to be covered.

There's hardly room for it in the primary school timetable either as teachers are under pressure to deliver the course content in other subjects too.

So what you appear to be suggesting is spending more time teaching children material that will be largely irrelevant to them either in their daily lives, and will likely be largely irrelevant to them into the future when they will disregard much of what they've been taught anyway.

The parents are generally in a better position to understand their childs individual social educational needs than any mandatory formal education will ever give their children.

meeeeh

Considering UK has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in EU, you do wonder what they were doing up till now.

While I agree that sex education is needed I am not sure UK is the model that should be followed.

The_Valeyard

meeeeh wrote: »

Considering UK has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in EU, you do wonder what they were doing up till now.

While I agree that sex education is needed I am not sure UK is the model that should be followed.

Probably too busy sorting out teachers that were sleeping students.

freshpopcorn

I'm near twenty five and went to a standard Catholic primary and secondary school in Ireland.
In primary school we had standard sex education in six class and to be honest I didn't really pay a lot of attention at it.
In secondary school we covered basic online security, mental health, sexuality orientation, we even had a gay week.To be honest I don't think they could have done much more and if they did the interest simply would not be their and people would have cut the class. There's nothing worse than forcing people into things.
If you ask people I went to school with about any of tough people will have it forgotten because their wasn't a test or they would say oh we went to a Catholic school.
I've a relative teaching in primary school and they cover a lot bits about online safety and bullying.
I know a few people who were silly on social media/basic camera phone when they were teenagers but they still make the same mistakes now and no matter how much someone tried to advise or help them they simply would not listen.
I'd find the same regarding people having sex.No matter how information you provide they simply don't listen.

The_Valeyard

eviltwin wrote: »

That has to change. This is far too important to let parents veto it.

No, that can never be the way. Same with religion or other subjects, the State cannot and should not force content on students without the consent of parents. If you believe a child can be removed from Religious Education because it conflicts with the ethos or views of the parents, then the same applies with Sex Ed or whatever the case may be.

I seriously doubt even a handful of parents would remove their child from Sex Ed. But I would agree with earlier posters, basic Ed for primary level, basic biological functions, puberty, intercourse, etc. While junior cycle can deal with more concrete and detailed information presented in a coherent and modulised course.