Sex education at school... For and against
Individual rights, social obligations must be balanced, writes Ray Hartle
Parents have the first and last say in the lives of their minor children, but the state must also play a role in the physical and psychological development — and protection — of its youngest citizens.
In the hullabaloo about comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), it’s easy to ignore this fact about how we live with individual rights and social obligations in our constitutional democracy.
The controversy erupted when it became known that the department of basic education had finalised Scripted Lesson Plans (SLP) to be incorporated into the CSE policy which is being piloted in five provinces.
A Facebook group, #LeaveOurKidsAlone, has been vociferous in its rejection of the education plan.
But others have suggested that the CSE programme is exactly what is needed — alongside other initiatives — to address the pressures young children face from abusive adults and even their peers.
The Eastern Cape is not included in the pilot study, but department spokesperson Terence Khala said that 30 schools each in Nyandeni local municipality and Nelson Mandela metro would be part of “rollout testing” in 2020. Khala did not respond to a follow-up query on what exactly the rollout in the two Eastern Cape municipalities would involve.
The Daily Dispatch examined comments by the Facebook group and asked some observers of education policy to comment on the controversy.
The leader of the Facebook group #LeaveOurKidsAlone and mother of four primary schoolchildren, Lauren Evanthia, has proclaimed herself to be “on a mission” to put an end to “any and all sexual education in public school classrooms”.
Evanthia admits she was not aware that CSE has been taught in schools since 2000. She asserts her role to decide “when the right time is — and how — to introduce the topic of sexuality to my children”.
Understandably, Evanthia and many others “do not trust government to teach our children”. She suggests government should focus on “eradicating poverty and fixing up our justice system”, and assist parents to teach correct principles at home “that will protect their children from abuse”. She wants children to “remain innocent as long as they need to”.
The #LeaveOurKidsAlone group’s Facebook page is riddled with conservative, religion-based comment.
There are clear racist undertones in posts such as “the Illuminati’s” global plan for “the creation of racism offences” and “Bibles are replaced with sangoma lessons”.
Evanthia states that the group did not exist “to debate or discuss or negotiate. This is a group for all who oppose sex-ed in our schools ... If you disagree with what we stand for, leave the group and debate elsewhere.”
One poster on Evanthia’s site suggested that “next they’ll want to give or have live demonstrations in class ... Hell no”.
University of Cape Town academic Dr Patti Silbert, who specialises in schools development, cautions against an approach that prefers either a parent or a teacher to teach children about sexuality. Instead, she argues for “a well-rounded, robust and integrated curriculum” that involves parents, schools, universities and community organisations.
She says that ideally, “parents and/or trusted adults should take primary responsibility for teaching sex and sexuality education”.
“However, we know in reality that in most instances parents lack the skills, confidence and understanding to engage meaningfully in discussions about sex with their children. Indeed, many parents make conscious choices not to discuss issues pertaining to sex with their children, for fear it will encourage sexual behaviour.
She says many children do not live with their parents, but with older siblings or relatives.
Silbert says there are high levels of HIV/Aids and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among adolescents and youth aged 10 to 24, high rates of youth pregnancy, gender-based violence and child marriage. “We live in a society fraught with power imbalances and gender hierarchies, and we know that gender inequality and particular versions of masculinity lie at the root of sexual violence.”
Arguing that “knowledge is power”, Silbert says the intention of CSE includes helping to empower youth to build an accurate understanding of their bodies, and to develop healthy values, attitudes and behaviour when it comes to sexuality, identity and relationships.
“CSE aims to equip learners to understand the meaning of consent, agency and choice.”
Silbert says the CSE content is age-appropriate and contextually relevant. The SLP clearly explains and constantly reinforces relevant terminology, builds on content taught in previous grades, is values-based and rightsbased, and focuses on building safe learning spaces. It also encourages discussion with parents or trusted adults at home.
The contestation in SA relates to the introduction of CSE in Grade 4, and the fear that the programme would encourage children to experiment with sex from an early age.
“It is important to acknowledge that children are sexualised from a young age and that they learn from each other about sex, often in ways that are harmful.”
Instead, she says that an early start for sexuality education “gradually equips and empowers young people with the necessary knowledge, skills and understanding to have safe, consensual, fulfilling relationships long before they will act on their sexuality”.
Research shows that “age appropriate sexuality education does not ‘corrupt innocence’; and that a failure to deliver such education increases the likelihood of high-risk behaviour and earlier first sexual experiences”.
However, Silber says CSE is also highly contentious elsewhere in the world. For many people, sex is a taboo subject “and the idea of sex being taught in schools will inevitably conflict with certain religious ideas, beliefs and attitudes”.
She says government should have prioritised consultation with school governing bodies, parents, teachers and other stakeholders.
Petru Majola, director of Khula community development project in Peddie, whose work includes children’s rights, said that he had read enough of the CSE material to give him a sense that the material was “very good”. The purpose and the content was not to teach children about how to become sexually active but to build a caring society and a responsible individual.
But, Majola said, such a good idea should not be carried out by teachers in schools. Instead, parents should be given enough skill and resources to educate their children.
In his view, those opposed to the CSE programme have a legitimate gripe, because it is the parent’s responsibility “to mentor and assist a child in getting through all developmental stages”.
“And that responsibility should not be outsourced,” he said firmly.
Majola said he could not support any programme which “takes away what parents should be doing to for their own kids”.
He said that, in the past, the community and a village would contribute to a child’s wellbeing and that had worked well in some cases.
“We should strengthen the House of Traditional Leaders and other community structures in an effort to build and raise a child in a conducive environment. Families have a role to play and therefore this subject should be taught at home.
“Remember, each family has its own values and beliefs, as well as cultural ideologies, and so a family should be given its space to mentor and to raise a child.”
He said the department “should learn to lobby parents to support these initiatives in a professional manner”.
Sophie Hobbs, communications head of Nacosa, a network of organisations working in the field of HIV, Aids and TB, said that the outcry over CSE was as a result of misunderstanding the need for CSE and the overall scope of the curriculum and lesson plans.
“CSE is an age-appropriate‚ culturally relevant and rights-based approach to sexuality and relationships‚ which explicitly addresses issues of gender and power‚ and provides scientifically accurate‚ practical information in a non-judgmental way.
“It is backed up by a significant body of evidence which shows that it works to help prevent HIV, gender-based violence, early sexual debut and unwanted early pregnancies — all issues that affect us significantly in SA.
“I think that once people understand that this is about empowering young people with the facts to help them make the right choices, most parents will support it.
Hobbs agreed that SA needed a comprehensive approach that incorporated the home, the school, the community, the health care setting as well as change at a structural level.
Alongside its work providing sexual and reproductive health rights information to the youth, Hobbs said Nacosa also held community dialogues and “engaged with caregivers”.
“Parents are the first teachers of their children and they are primarily responsible for guiding their children safely to adulthood. But the reality is that many parents or caregivers do not have the necessary conversations about sex and sexuality with their children.
“Parents and young people report a number of obstacles to open dialogue, including lack of knowledge and skills as well as cultural norms and taboos.
“There are also a lot children (like those orphaned by Aids) who are growing up with little or no parental support. Schools, through the life orientation curriculum, have a critical role to play in helping children and youth safely navigate their way through adolescence.”
She said part of Nacosa’s role was to help reassure parents “that everywhere it has been implemented globally, CSE has been shown to decrease risky sexual behaviour. In our view it is a potentially life-saving intervention”.
“On a mission” to put an end to “any and all sexual education in public school classrooms”
He could not support any programme which “takes away what parents should be doing to for their own kids”