Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Is primary school too early for sex education?
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?th readID=4444&&&edition=1&ttl=20061023134309
Personally I think the timing of sex education in schools is about right at the moment, there is no need to burden the minds of 10 year olds.
Personally I think the timing of sex education in schools is about right at the moment, there is no need to burden the minds of 10 year olds.
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Loosehead. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The experience in Scandanavia and the Netherlands is that if you teach children from early enough they not only take on board the lessons about contraception, but they also start having sex much later. Their education places great focus on values and attitudes towards sex and sexuality.
In the UK, it's cursory, clinical and too late. In the 70s when I was at junior school, I remember a kid coming in with a book on reproduction and we all stood around reading it in the playground. Kids will learn from each other, even if they're learning rubbish and half-lies. It is certainly not news to them at ten, so surely it makes more sense to have this information presented responsibly and accurately? And if you don't believe there's a problem with the kids' understanding a simple Google will tell you how many uneducated teenagers genuinely believe you can't get pregnant the first time, or if you do it standing up etc. No wonder we've got the highest rate in Europe.
Formalising sex education at an early age seems to me to give a better chance of reducing the levels of sexual diseases and pregnancies and producing sexually responsible people than going "la la la" and hoping it's okay to tell them something at 14 when frightening proportions of them have already started to experiment.
Personally, I will be telling my children about sex and sexuality from about the age of ten. I believe it is irresponsible to do otherwise.
In the UK, it's cursory, clinical and too late. In the 70s when I was at junior school, I remember a kid coming in with a book on reproduction and we all stood around reading it in the playground. Kids will learn from each other, even if they're learning rubbish and half-lies. It is certainly not news to them at ten, so surely it makes more sense to have this information presented responsibly and accurately? And if you don't believe there's a problem with the kids' understanding a simple Google will tell you how many uneducated teenagers genuinely believe you can't get pregnant the first time, or if you do it standing up etc. No wonder we've got the highest rate in Europe.
Formalising sex education at an early age seems to me to give a better chance of reducing the levels of sexual diseases and pregnancies and producing sexually responsible people than going "la la la" and hoping it's okay to tell them something at 14 when frightening proportions of them have already started to experiment.
Personally, I will be telling my children about sex and sexuality from about the age of ten. I believe it is irresponsible to do otherwise.
I think 10 is a very good age to learn actually. Kids are getting sexually curious at younger ages so it seems the right thing to do. We currently have the highest rate of young mothers in Europe I believe so it seems sensible to try and get the facts of life in to kids at a young age.
Also, my mum told me about the birds and the bees at around 10 so that I didn't start hearing secondary school believing the normal load of tosh teenagers are likely to spout about sex if they know nothing about it. It worked.
Also, my mum told me about the birds and the bees at around 10 so that I didn't start hearing secondary school believing the normal load of tosh teenagers are likely to spout about sex if they know nothing about it. It worked.
It is not all down to sex education, the kids are taught about numourous things these days, smoking, eating the right food, bullying, dropping litter, all manner of things, but once out those school gates in most cases it is forgotten.
No I think we have to go backwards in time to find the solution to the increase in teenage pregnacies, and ask where we have gone wrong. Now I am far from an expert on these matters, and the only qualification I have on this subject is a Degree from the Universary of Time.
So here is my slant on things, and I am in no doubt that the modernists will say I am talking a load of piffle, but here goes.
(1) Re-introduce single sex education, in my day the Boys and the Girls where taught apart. Then there was none of this over familisation with the opposite sex. This in turn created a mutual respect for each other.
(2) Make the families of these youngsters take on board most of the responsibility for their teenagers pregnancies i.e. the state to house them and provide benefits for them only in extreme circumstances.
(3) Clamp down on these young Fathers, and use the full weight of the law to bring them to justice, if the girl is below the age of consent. After all haven't they commited an act of Paedophilia?
(4) The Goverment to make it more advantagous for a couple to be married.
(5) Making it compulsary for parents to use part of the now extented pregancy leave, attending classes on the upbringing of children.
Well now pull this all to pieces or add to the list, depending on who's side you are batting for.
No I think we have to go backwards in time to find the solution to the increase in teenage pregnacies, and ask where we have gone wrong. Now I am far from an expert on these matters, and the only qualification I have on this subject is a Degree from the Universary of Time.
So here is my slant on things, and I am in no doubt that the modernists will say I am talking a load of piffle, but here goes.
(1) Re-introduce single sex education, in my day the Boys and the Girls where taught apart. Then there was none of this over familisation with the opposite sex. This in turn created a mutual respect for each other.
(2) Make the families of these youngsters take on board most of the responsibility for their teenagers pregnancies i.e. the state to house them and provide benefits for them only in extreme circumstances.
(3) Clamp down on these young Fathers, and use the full weight of the law to bring them to justice, if the girl is below the age of consent. After all haven't they commited an act of Paedophilia?
(4) The Goverment to make it more advantagous for a couple to be married.
(5) Making it compulsary for parents to use part of the now extented pregancy leave, attending classes on the upbringing of children.
Well now pull this all to pieces or add to the list, depending on who's side you are batting for.
Not taking sides, a couple of them make sense, but I think the single sex school option is not the way forward. I went to a single sex school, my sisters did not. There were loads of girls who got pregnant at my school compared to the two or three at my sisters. And both schools at the time had excellent reputations.
Is this really a new thing? Maybe it's different in England but, in Scotland, I recieved sex education in primary school aged 10, and that was 33 years ago. Before the lessons I remember being told in the playground that "the mannie puts his willie in the wiffie's f*nny, then they both start peeing. Whoever pees the hardest wins." I think recieving the facts is preferable.
Our sex education was entirely biological at school circa. 1995ish, with a lot of sperm and embryo talk, and then at the end a load of gruesome slides showing the various diseases you could get, which I can only assume was there to make us scared to have sex.
The onus should be on relationships and precautions as much as the biological element. 10 years old seems about right to me, especially with the increasing sexualisation of children that we have in the Western world, combined with the openly available images of sexuality that children have available to them. 30 years ago they never had to contend with pop videos with semi-naked women aimed at young teenagers, thongs for 12 year olds and playboy pencil cases.
I would think that most kids by about 10 will certainly have heard gossip and rumours, and others will know a lot more. Let them know the facts early, and they can begin to form informed thoughts on the subject.
The onus should be on relationships and precautions as much as the biological element. 10 years old seems about right to me, especially with the increasing sexualisation of children that we have in the Western world, combined with the openly available images of sexuality that children have available to them. 30 years ago they never had to contend with pop videos with semi-naked women aimed at young teenagers, thongs for 12 year olds and playboy pencil cases.
I would think that most kids by about 10 will certainly have heard gossip and rumours, and others will know a lot more. Let them know the facts early, and they can begin to form informed thoughts on the subject.
I work in Primary Education - they already get sex ed...
Anyway, whilst I feel it is too young, it is (unfortunately) something of a necessity in these days where sexuality is thrust on us from all directions (no pun intended). I'm quite appalled at the way some parent let their children dress, and at the way women are presented in pop videos that are transmitted on children's shows (and don't get me started on that Bratz line of dolls...) Don't get me wrong - I'm as interested in sex as the next guy - but our culture is becoming way too focussed on using sex to create an interest in pretty much anything. (Sorry, bit of a rant!)
So whilst children should be allowed to be children, we need to change our culture's attitude to sex before we can allow our children to remain innocent of the facts of life until past primary age.
Anyway, whilst I feel it is too young, it is (unfortunately) something of a necessity in these days where sexuality is thrust on us from all directions (no pun intended). I'm quite appalled at the way some parent let their children dress, and at the way women are presented in pop videos that are transmitted on children's shows (and don't get me started on that Bratz line of dolls...) Don't get me wrong - I'm as interested in sex as the next guy - but our culture is becoming way too focussed on using sex to create an interest in pretty much anything. (Sorry, bit of a rant!)
So whilst children should be allowed to be children, we need to change our culture's attitude to sex before we can allow our children to remain innocent of the facts of life until past primary age.
Our children are aware of sex, relationships, values of keeping their bodies for themselves etc from the word go partly because I think it is vitally important that young children are informed and therefore empowered to be able to make decisions and protect themselevs armed with accurate knowledge and partly because we have animals and the invariable question from our three or four year olds has been when ******** are "treading" chickens or sheep are mating "what are they doing?"
If you explain and answer them sensibly without embarassment or omission then that's it, it leads to other curious questions and before you know what's happened you haver a very clued up little person whose not embarassed, that has learned about sex and gender quite naturally but who has in no way "lost" their innocence in any way. I actually firmly believe that having a young child who knows about such things makes them safer from peodophiles and makes them more likely to feel they know all about sex and will wait as they mature into their teens.
My eight year old daughter understands all about sex, periods, gender, pregnancy, conception and about the importance of making sure that sex is something special to be shared between two adults, and should in no way ever be forced, coerced or an unpleasant experience.She knows that her body is hers and no-one else's to be touched no matter what they may tell her. She knows all that at eight and is happy and well adjusted about it, but she still believes in Father Christmas, so how is her innocence gone?
If you explain and answer them sensibly without embarassment or omission then that's it, it leads to other curious questions and before you know what's happened you haver a very clued up little person whose not embarassed, that has learned about sex and gender quite naturally but who has in no way "lost" their innocence in any way. I actually firmly believe that having a young child who knows about such things makes them safer from peodophiles and makes them more likely to feel they know all about sex and will wait as they mature into their teens.
My eight year old daughter understands all about sex, periods, gender, pregnancy, conception and about the importance of making sure that sex is something special to be shared between two adults, and should in no way ever be forced, coerced or an unpleasant experience.She knows that her body is hers and no-one else's to be touched no matter what they may tell her. She knows all that at eight and is happy and well adjusted about it, but she still believes in Father Christmas, so how is her innocence gone?
I am frankly horrified at anotheoldgit's response to this. Sex and the law make very unhappy bedfellows and it would take several very large volumes (if not a whole library) to catalogue the unhappiness that has been caused down the ages because of a draconian attitude to regulating sexual activity.
I'm with Waldo and noxlumos on this one; the experience of Holland and the Scandinavian countries is ample evidence.
Basically I could sum it all up in one sentence: If you think knowledge is dangerous, try ignorance!
I'm with Waldo and noxlumos on this one; the experience of Holland and the Scandinavian countries is ample evidence.
Basically I could sum it all up in one sentence: If you think knowledge is dangerous, try ignorance!
We had sex education at the age of ten at school (I'm now 28). As many girls start their periods at around this age, it is a sensible time for children to receive sex education. How is keeping the 'facts of life' from them going to help? Nobody is suggesting giving them the Kama Sutra to read as homework, but they should be educated re. how their bodies are changing and why.
Old Git, with regard to point two, the problem is that many single mothers are the product of single mothers themselves, so their families are already in state-provided accomodation, living on benefits! And on point five, I really don't feel that I need classes on bringing up my children thanks. How do you agree on the right way to bring up a child? Now even Supernanny's naughty step is coming under critiscism!
Old Git, with regard to point two, the problem is that many single mothers are the product of single mothers themselves, so their families are already in state-provided accomodation, living on benefits! And on point five, I really don't feel that I need classes on bringing up my children thanks. How do you agree on the right way to bring up a child? Now even Supernanny's naughty step is coming under critiscism!
1 to 15 of 15
Latest Posts
ChatterBank40 mins ago
ChatterBank102 mins ago
Crosswords104 mins ago
Spectator N0 2651 By Fieldfare
Crosswords110 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.