Sex education in schools

Possible changes

(J, burns 2016) stated Four key House of Commons committees wrote to Nicky Morgan last month, pressing for sex education to be made statutory in primaries and secondary's. Many groups including the national aids trust are pushing for all schools including academies and free schools to have compulsory sexual education however the education secretary at the time Nicky Morgan rejected this proposal. She claims this is because the current compulsory SRE is not good enough and needs to be improved before applying to all schools However what's worse sex education that needs improvement or no sex education whatsoever?

Comparing the Netherlands with the US

- Netherlands more open form of sex education - no difference in types of sex being had in the US and Netherlands (vaginal, anal and oral) - Netherlands more likely to use contraceptive methods even when controlling for gender ( Fegurson et al., 2008)

Abstinence base sex Ed in the US

Between 1997 and 2008, US government provided more than $1.5 billion to education programs focused on abstinence until marriage. Federal guidance prohibited programs using these funds to discuss contraceptive methods, except to emphasize their failure rates (HHS, Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, 2004) Systematic reviews have concluded the ineffectiveness abstinence only education has on both delaying sexual debut and reducing sexual risk behaviours among teens (Bennett & Assefi, 2005; Underhill, Montgomery, & Operario, 2007)

Dutch sex ed

Dutch and UK sex education (Lewis and Knijne, 2003): biological and social aspects separated Netherlands SRE is taught from age of 4 (de Melker, 1996) Sex education is not considered controversial in the Netherlands (de Melker, 1996) teen birth rates in 2014 per 1000 women aged 15-19, in the USA 24, in the UK 15, in the Netherlands 4 (Group, 2016),

Timeline of sex education

Education Act of 1993 (All state schools had to provide sex education in some way or another - including in primary schools) , Education Act of 1996, (Anatomy, puberty, biological aspects of reproduction, hormones, STIs were all confirmed as mandatory. School governors had to come up with detailed sex education policies.) Parents' rights to withdraw a child from SRE Section 405 of the Education Act 1996 enables parents to withdraw their children from sex education other than the sex education that is in the National Curriculum (such as the biological aspects of human growth and reproduction that are essential elements of National Curriculum Science). (Long. 2016) Learning And Skills Act, (2000), which broadened sex education and young people were protected from inappropriate teaching on the basis of their religious and cultural background. 2013: 'Not Yet Good Enough' published by OFSTED (DFE, 2015)

Younger Sex Education

Primary schools do have the option to teach basic sex education E.g. The Department recommends that all primary schools should have a sex and relationship education programme tailored to the age and the physical and emotional maturity of the children. It should ensure that both boys and girls know about puberty and how a baby is born (R, Long. 2016)

Current UK Policy

SRE is compulsory from 11+: only includes relates to science. Parents can withdraw their children from any other parts of sex and relationship education. Schools are required to make a written policy on sex education available to parents for free to allow them to make an informed decision in regards to withdrawal ("The national curriculum," 2016). Academies and free schools are free to choose not to teach SRE at all, however if they do choose to they must follow the guidelines previously mentioned (Long 2016). Increased in academies This could be extremely harmful for SRE as academies have the ability to opt out of any of the curriculum they wish as they are not controlled by local authorities. (see slides for stats)

York university on consent

Similar ideas about consent lessons were attempted at York university, however this was not well received by the students. Students stage walkout in protest over 'patronising' sexual consent classes (pells 2016) Of the class around a quarter walked out Some stated: There is no correct way to negotiate getting someone into bed with you. In suggesting that there is, consent talks encourage women to interpret sexual experiences that have not been preceded by a lengthy, formal and sober contractual discussion as rape. "Consent talks propagate the backward message that all women are potential victims and all men potential rapists."

What is the current curriculum?

The current curriculum states that only the biological aspects need to be covered and should be approached from a scientific angle, this curriculum includes: -The physical changes during puberty -The anatomy of genitalia -How reproduction occurs

Non compulsory topics: RSPA

The house of commons has released a guide of non compulsory topics but they do believe should be taught these include: Relationships Sexual identity and orientation Puberty Alternate contraception The problem with this though is It leaves it up to the school itself to decide what to teach this can cause issues if those in charge of the schools education are biased e.g. by religion this can affect education

Lessons on consent

consent is mentioned very few times and rarely taught however there seems to be plans to introduce it in year seven.(BBC, news 2015) The introduction to the draft document, which is due to be launched this year, says young people should be taught about consent before they are sexually active. It says learning about healthy relationships is "crucial" to keeping those under the age of 16 who are sexually active "healthy and safe from abuse and exploitation".'

(Lindberg & Maddow-Zimet,2012)

formal sex education before first sex, particularly when including instruction about both delaying sex and birth control methods, was associated with a range of healthier outcomes as compared with not receiving instruction in either topic. adolescents that were in receipt of both abstinence and abstinence+birth control tend to delay first sex significantly more often than those in receipt of no SRE. (Lindberg & Maddow-Zimet, 2012). It was also found that females receiving Ab+BC were significantly more likely than those receiving only abstinence and neither form of education to use a condom at first sex. Positive associations between Ab+BC and longer term outcomes were also found, particularly among male respondents, reducing their likelihood of having gotten a partner pregnant, multiple partnerships, and recent STI treatment, and increasing the likelihood of condom use at most recent sex. These relationships were however indirect and operated through older age at first sex. Overall Lindberg and Maddow-Zimet found significant differences between receiving no sex education and receiving either abstinence or abstinence plus, however fewer differences were found between abstinence and abstinence plus. This may however be at least in part related to how birth control is taught in the US. In the USA, government funded sex education programmes at the time of this study were only permitted to teach birth control to highlight it's failings and not promote its use. (HHS, Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, 2004). It is possible that if birth control was being taught more comprehensively there would have been more differences between abstinence and abstinence plus education (Ferguson et al 2008).