Anyone else feel that parents shouldn't be allowed to opt their kids out of sex ed?

hatrickpatrick

I've been thinking about all the talk lately around better sex ed, free contraception, etc "to make sure abortions are as rare as possible" in the aftermath of the referendum. One thing that's struck me is the fact that parents are still allowed to opt their children out of school sex ed.

This is purely anecdotal, but the one teenage pregnancy in my own year in school was fathered by the one guy whose parents I vividly remember not allowing him to attend the school's RSE, either in primary or secondary school. I can't help but wonder if the lack of neutral guidance (without moralising around the subject) may have contributed to this - it always stayed with me that out of the whole year, there was only one person whose parents denied him the chance to attend sex ed in school, and there was only one person who got someone pregnant. Go figure. The girl was in a different year, so I don't know her circumstances around sex ed.

I honestly feel that this is something which should be compulsory in this day and age. I have to assume that most - probably not all, but most - parents who refuse sex ed for their kids are either (a) hopelessly naive in assuming "my kid is too young to be thinking about sex", or (b) conservative types who don't want their kids being taught that sex isn't wrong and something they shouldn't be thinking about until they get married or whatever. Both of these ideologies are well known to actually increase risky sex and teenage pregnancy (certain parts of the United States come irresistibly to mind here, abstinence only and all that sh!te), and in my view are also extremely harmful to psychological development (telling a kid that their natural desires are somehow "wrong" or "sinful" when they're about to experience puberty is psychologically abusive as far as I'm concerned) - I've been with women whose mothers hammered the whole slut shaming "no man will touch you if he finds out your 'number'" sh!te into them and who were traumatised as a result. Horrible stuff to have a partner confide in you to be honest.

With all that being said, does anyone else feel that we should no longer allow parents to dictate if, when, and most importantly how their children are taught about sex? We don't allow parents to choose to not educate their kids in reading or arithmetic - an ultra-conservative Muslim family who believe that their daughter shouldn't have a standard education, for example, will be getting a swift visit from social services if their kid isn't being properly schooled - so why do we still allow it when it comes to something as important, central to the human experience, and where ignorance is extremely dangerous, as sex education? I'd argue that if we can make a legal and political case for it being neglectful not to have one's children educated in how to read, write and do simple mathematics, all of which are important for life, it's an absolute no brainier that we can make a similar case for a fully rounded sex education, and that teaching a young boy that he'll go blind if he touches his weiner, or a young girl that having too many partners in her lifetime renders her somehow "tainted", is emotionally and psychologically abusive and neglectful.

Should this be something we work on changing? Given the overwhelming yes vote at the weekend, along with the gay marriage result a few years ago, it strikes me that the national mood is firmly against sexual conservatism at the moment. Might be the optimum time to have a national debate over denying children a neutral, facts-based sex education, and whether this is something we should continue to allow as an exception to the general requirement that children receive an education in other vital areas of life knowledge and skills.

Thoughts?

eviltwin

Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

Sardonicat

eviltwin wrote: »

Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

Interesting, I didn't know that went on. Is the sex ed curriculum not set by the Dept of Ed? I don't have kids so I'm clueless on this topic. (Sex ed in schools not sex)

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I think it should be mandatory but should come from the parents.

hatrickpatrick

eviltwin wrote: »

Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.

eviltwin

Sardonicat wrote: »

Interesting, I didn't know that went on. Is the sex ed curriculum not set by the Dept of Ed? I don't have kids so I'm clueless on this topic. (Sex ed in schools not sex)

This is going back 6/7 years, the school outsourced its sex ed to a Catholic group, we got a letter home about the content and I wasn't happy with it so I opted her out.

I think sex education should be covered in school because you can't rely on parents unfortunately. I think it needs to cover everything from the biology of pregnancy to contraception, lgbt issues, abortion, consent, abuse etc but I appreciate some parents don't want their kids exposed to that.

hatrickpatrick

Troy Uneven Sunfish wrote: »

I think it should be mandatory but should come from the parents.

The problem with this is that it still leaves the door open to parents with ultraconservative ideologies to traumatise their kids with fire and brimstone style crap about sex. I'm only speaking from personal experience here, but I once had a girl "confess" to me, on the verge of tears, how many guys she'd been with before - because her mum had apparently told her repeatedly that no man would ever want to touch her if he found out that she was such a "slut". We were in our early twenties when this happened and it's haunted me ever since - that's why I advocate a neutral sex ed in a school setting with other kids, so that this kind of psychologically abusive sh!te doesn't get lumped in with "by the way, this is where babies come from".

hatrickpatrick

eviltwin wrote: »

I think it needs to cover everything from the biology of pregnancy to contraception, lgbt issues, abortion, consent, abuse etc but I appreciate some parents don't want their kids exposed to that.

Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

freshpopcorn

I'd be 50/50 about it to be honest.
Would it be mandatory for home schooled kids?
If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

People who'd be overly conservative will start teaching their kid that sex outside marriage, homosexuality, etc are wrong from an early age and will continue to do so. They'd tell their kids that if you follow what that teacher said. You'd go to hell.

freshpopcorn

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr

biko

Kids should not be able to skip sex ed (nor PE and other classes).
If a parent have a problem with the way it is taught then he/she needs to bring it up with the school, not withhold necessary information from their kids.

eviltwin

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

You see the way I look at it, I don't want say Iona coming into my kids school to give sex ed because they don't represent the kind of message I want to give my child. So I can understand a religious parent having an issue with a liberal sex ed curriculum. I don't think their position is right but I can understand their point of view to an extent.

Maybe the solution is to give teenagers the right to self consent without the need for parental approval.

hatrickpatrick

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'd be 50/50 about it to be honest.
Would it be mandatory for home schooled kids?
If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

People who'd be overly conservative will start teaching their kid that sex outside marriage, homosexuality, etc are wrong from an early age and will continue to do so. They'd tell their kids that if you follow what that teacher said. You'd go to hell.

This I'd argue should be considered child neglect. I actually feel that it's inevitable that it eventually will be. For those of a right-leaning sensibility who feel that this is a nanny state proposal, I'd ask if they'd feel the same if we were talking about an ultraconservative family of Middle Eastern immigrants teaching their daughter that she has to cover her face in public and that she must obey a man at all times, etc - I think most would agree that this is emotional abuse, so we can establish that parental autonomy in instilling cultural values does in fact have some hard limits. If we can agree on that, it's just a question of establishing where that line is, and I'd argue that sexual repression, with all the psychological damage that comes with it, is definitely over the line.

Obviously that's just my own opinion and largely born out of personal experience and not just theoretical politics. Maybe others have different experiences, but I'm always surprised at how many young women in my age group have parentally-inherited fears and hangups around their own sexuality. I'd imagine there are guys who have different but related hangups as well. And to be honest any time I've had a conversation about this with a woman who was terrified about being seen as a slut or "damaged goods" because of some right wing sh!te her mum drilled into her as a kid, it just breaks my heart. It's harrowing stuff if you're the kind of person people are comfortable opening up to - some of the things you hear about the lies people were taught about sex are just awful.

hatrickpatrick

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr

Wow. That's one I'll have to look into... World view on slightly shaky grounds right now :eek:

eviltwin

Sex ed is just one piece of the picture. There's no point in teaching students about safe sex when they have to be a certain age to buy condoms, need parental permission to get the pill and have to pay a fairly high cost for both.

the_syco

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr

I'd wonder what sort of sex-ed was given, and how much of it recommended the "no sex" approach?

TheDavester

Depends whose teaching it, wouldn't want a left wing loony like LON/Mullally or a right wing/religious moron doing it

coffee_cake

eviltwin wrote: »

You see the way I look at it, I don't want say Iona coming into my kids school to give sex ed because they don't represent the kind of message I want to give my child. So I can understand a religious parent having an issue with a liberal sex ed curriculum. I don't think their position is right but I can understand their point of view to an extent.

Maybe the solution is to give teenagers the right to self consent without the need for parental approval.

Yeah i can understand especially if it's like that abstinence only sellotape nonsense they do with kids in some of the states.
Even govt mandated education can be a bit suspect as they will always have an agenda also eg the whole food thing pushing more cereals.
I suppose we all agree it should be done it's just a question of how

Malayalam

How did we survive the 80s when our school sex ed came from an awkward prim married couple squirming at the top of the room and telling us about Gods greatest way of showing love? And yet we did and worked out which peg into which slot miraculously without hearing one single word about the gender unicorn.

Compulsory anything in education kind of reeks of fascism.....

judeboy101

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

eviltwin wrote: »

Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.

What facts? Liberal facts or conservative facts or just scientific facts.

Mrs OBumble

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.

Consent is a moralistic spin.

You really think we should teach buological facts without touching on on it?

Emotional consequences of sexual activity is believed to be a scientific fact by some (usually those with some understanding of brain chemistry) and a fairy tale by others. Do we include it or not?

wexie

eviltwin wrote: »

This is going back 6/7 years, the school outsourced its sex ed to a Catholic group, we got a letter home about the content and I wasn't happy with it so I opted her out.

TheDavester wrote: »

Depends whose teaching it, wouldn't want a left wing loony like LON/Mullally or a right wing/religious moron doing it

It's a thin line between education and indoctrination when it comes to these things.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You really think we should teach buological facts without touching on on it?

Emotional consequences of sexual activity is believed to be a scientific fact by some (usually those with some understanding of brain chemistry) and a fairy tale by others. Do we include it or not?

I was actually going to comment just that....but you're right...wouldn't be much of an education if they're taught just the what and how without the why and when.

hmmm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Malayalam wrote: »

How did we survive the 80s when our school sex ed came from an awkward prim married couple squirming at the top of the room and telling us about Gods greatest way of showing love? And yet we did and worked out which peg into which slot miraculously without hearing one single word about the gender unicorn.

Compulsory anything in education kind of reeks of fascism.....

Depends on the nessecity of the subject. English and Maths should be compulsory for a start. Probably science too. Sex Ed? I'd argue yes.

TheValeyard

Parents are the primary educators therefore have the right to withdraw their child from any class or subject that goes against their wishes or beliefs.

TheValeyard

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Depends on the nessecity of the subject. English and Maths should be compulsory for a start. Probably science too. Sex Ed? I'd argue yes.

Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

BarryD2

freshpopcorn wrote: »

If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

Well they already do! Home Education is a broad church with almost as many views as families involved.

The Irish Christian Home Educators Association https://www.ichea.net/ caters for those with a biblical bent.

We home educated our children but more from the POV that there was too much religion in primary schools as opposed to too little as with above.

However each to their own

Re OP, I think kids these days are remarkably switched in to what their age peers think and know. It's like osmosis sometimes.

Franz Von Peppercorn

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

I personally think that sex education has no effect whatsoever, your anecdote aside.

Kids will learn about sex from each other or the internet. They will know that sex causes pregnancy.

The class will have little or no effect.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

Why so? Unless you're saying that all subjects are of equal importance, I don't really understand why this is the case? (Bearing in mind, I'm only talking secondary here - with the exception of sex ed, which obviously would be secondary)

As it is, a lot of subjects in secondary are optional anyway.

I'm also curious as to why it's the parents who should choose: why should the students not get to choose what they study themsleves? Why shouldn't a kid of about 14-15 get to present their own case as to why they should learn about sex education?

Malayalam

In terms of what people shouldn't be allowed to do (regarding whatever) we should ask ourselves exactly how much personal power we wish to cede to the state. To interfere in the lives of families, for example. I know that we cede a certain amount of control to the state in return for protection, reasonable governance, public services and so on but I do find it kind of odd that whenever an issue is perceived that the reflex is to look to the state to impose regulations or in this case indoctrination. We are free beings, with dignity and sovereignty, and the least amount of compulsory things is best, once allowance is made for functional civil society. It's peculiar to me that people would not look first to themselves for guidance.

wexie

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Parents are the primary educators therefore have the right to withdraw their child from any class or subject that goes against their wishes or beliefs.

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

What'd I miss here? Are these two posts not a bit contradictory?

I kinda agree with the last one, think the first one would just be a recipe for disaster. What if they don't agree with evolution? Think the earth is flat?

Pac1Man

My sex ed was the teacher making is watch a video tape of a woman giving birth.

Nothing was blurred out.

I remember the colour green.