Schools told to make sex education ‘stage appropriate' as age limit plans axed
Primary school teachers may decide to discuss the sharing of naked images or online sexual content if it is affecting their pupils and they know that children have seen pornography, according to the final statutory Government guidance on relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) in schools.
Proposals to impose strict age limits on topics in the RSHE curriculum, proposed by the previous Conservative government, will not go ahead.
Draft guidance, published in May last year under the Conservatives, had suggested sex education should be taught no earlier than Year 5.
It had proposed for issues like sexual harassment, revenge porn, upskirting and sexual exploitation and abuse to not be taught before Year 7 (age 11), and for explicit discussion of sexual violence, including rape and sexual assault, to not take place before Year 9 (age 13).
The draft guidance also said schools should not teach pupils about the concept of 'gender identity'.
The final guidance on RSHE, which has been published a year after a consultation over the draft Conservative guidance closed, has not assigned specific ages to certain RSHE topics.
Instead, it said schools should develop the RSHE curriculum to be 'relevant, age and stage appropriate and accessible to pupils in their area'.
The Government guidance, published on Tuesday, said pupils should be taught the facts and the law about biological sex and gender reassignment.
But on the debate around biological sex and gender reassignment, it told schools to be 'careful not to endorse any particular view or teach it as fact'.
It said schools should avoid materials that use cartoons or diagrams that 'oversimplify' the topic, or which 'encourage pupils to question their gender'.
The Department for Education (DfE) has said revised guidance for schools and colleges on gender questioning children is due to be published this summer.
In her foreword to the updated RSHE guidance, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: 'The depth and breadth of views is clear, and there are understandable and legitimate areas of contention.
'Our guiding principles have been that all of the compulsory subject content must be age appropriate and developmentally appropriate.
'It must be taught sensitively and inclusively, with respect to the backgrounds and beliefs of pupils and parents while always with the aim of providing pupils with the knowledge they need of the law.'
When asked about removing the plans for strict age limits for sex education, Ms Phillipson told the BBC: 'I think what parents want to know is that they'll be able to see what's being taught.
'There sometimes can be occasions where it's necessary to broach a topic a little bit sooner in response to something that might have happened within the school, but parents would be informed and involved on that.'
The guidance said pupils should be given the opportunity to discuss the sexual norms endorsed by so-called 'involuntary celibates' (incels) or online influencers by the end of secondary school.
It added that secondary school pupils should be taught about the prevalence of 'deepfakes' and how pornography can portray 'misogynistic' attitudes and it can present harmful activities as normal.
Students should be taught that strangulation – applying pressure to someone's neck – is a criminal offence regardless of whether it causes injury.
The guidance has also advised secondary schools to work closely with mental health professionals to discuss suicide prevention in an age-appropriate way.
It added that schools should continue to share RSHE curriculum materials with parents on request.
Since September 2020, relationships and sex education has been compulsory in secondary schools in England, while relationships education has been compulsory in primary schools.
In March 2023, then-prime minister Rishi Sunak brought forward a review of RSHE guidance for schools after hearing concerns that children were being exposed to 'inappropriate' content.
Schools in England will have to follow the statutory RSHE guidance from September 2026.
Paul Whiteman, general secretary at school leaders' union NAHT, said: 'We are pleased to see that there are no age 'limits' included in this new guidance.
'Schools already work hard to ensure that teaching is age-appropriate and this approach gives them the vital flexibility to respond to their own community and the needs of pupils in their schools.'
But he added: 'NAHT has particular concerns that the inclusion of suicide prevention content has not been accompanied by a commitment from the Government to provide funded training for all teachers to give them both the knowledge and the confidence they need to discuss suicide prevention and self-harm with young people.
'The provision of training is vital before this content becomes statutory and it is unacceptable that the guidance simply says that schools should work with mental health professionals to discuss how this sensitive content should be tackled in the classroom.'
Margaret Mulholland, Send and inclusion specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: 'We welcome the clarity over biological sex and gender reassignment in the guidance.
'There are strongly held and sometimes polarised views over these issues and it is important to have a clear set of national guidelines to follow.
'We hope soon to see specific guidance on supporting gender questioning children – something for which we have been calling for several years.'
She added: 'We also welcome the focus on suicide prevention and pay tribute to campaigners for their work on highlighting this issue and the risks to young people.
'Schools already have a great deal of experience in supporting the wellbeing of pupils – and many have seen a rising number of young people struggling with their mental health in recent years.
'Unfortunately, there is still not enough external support available and we would like to see more work done to ensure that young people can access specialist services in a timely manner.'
Laura Mackay, chief executive officer of LGBT+ young people's charity Just Like Us, said: 'Some teachers still struggle to discuss LGBT+ topics with their pupils. So it's good to see the new RSHE guidance strongly encouraging primary schools to teach about diverse families, including same-sex parents.
'However, there are aspects of the new guidance that could make teachers feel even more anxious about what they can do or say to support all LGBT+ young people.
'If schools treat gender identity as something that is taboo, trans and gender diverse young people across the UK will feel further alienated and unsafe at school.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
36 minutes ago
- Times
Kemi Badenoch says Tories would ban doctors from going on strike
Kemi Badenoch has pledged to ban doctors from striking as she insisted Britain needed to cut spending to 'live within our means'. The Conservative leader said she would extend rules that prevent police officers and soldiers from striking to deal with what she called the increasingly 'militant' British Medical Association (BMA). Labour is scrapping Tory rules that would have allowed ministers to set out minimum levels of service staff would have to provide during strike action in the NHS and other public services. Badenoch said she would restore these for other NHS staff and go even further on doctors. 'The BMA has become militant. These strikes are going too far and it is time for action,' she said. Describing the measures as 'common-sense proposals to protect patients and the public finances', Badenoch said: 'These strikes will have a significant economic effect, but they will also mean cancelled operations, worry for families of the sick and suffering for those who are unwell. We know that previous strike action by doctors even led to some patients losing their lives.' She again praised Argentina's chainsaw-wielding President Milei, citing him as an inspiration for a future Conservative government. Badenoch has said she will not 'literally use a chainsaw' to cut spending but said that Britain was borrowing too much, adding: 'We need to start thinking about the next generation.' While seeking to distinguish herself from Nigel Farage, the Reform leader, with a tough line on public spending, Badenoch last week said she aimed to imitate Milei, who won power after brandishing a chainsaw to illustrate his approach to slashing state spending. He has balanced the budget and reduced inflation through deep cuts to public expenditure, such as pensions, which have provoked widespread protest. • The WhatsApp group: Kemi Badenoch revs up her cost-cutting chainsaw* 'I wouldn't literally use a chainsaw, but it was a very, very visual story that he told about making sure that Argentina lived within its means,' Badenoch said. She admitted Britain had 'a different set-up' to Argentina but told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips on Sky News: 'We need to start thinking about the next generation. We are borrowing our children's money to pay for today, to pay for welfare. We're paying £100 billion on debt interest. That's just not fair.' Badenoch previously pledged to stop people with milder mental health problems from claiming disability benefits. The government was forced to abandon plans to cut eligibility for welfare after a revolt by Labour backbenchers. While cuts in other areas are likely to be far more contentious for a Tory party heavily dependent on older voters, Badenoch insisted 'we need to live within our means' as a country. Farage has pledged to remove the two-child benefit cap as he seeks to win over cultural conservative voters who often want more public spending. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is expected to raise taxes in the autumn to cover the cost of retreats on cuts to welfare and pensioners' winter fuel payments, along with deteriorating economic forecasts and the rising cost of borrowing.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Two-tier policing is the nail in the coffin for Britain's social contract
Has a British Government ever appeared so terrified of its own people? More to the point, can you think of one that deserved it more? The social contract has been shredded. You go to work and pay your taxes for a state that seems to be crumbling into disrepair. In exchange, the Government takes your money, and uses it to fund an alleged secret scheme to fly in Taliban fighters to live on your street. But don't worry – we've got a new 'elite police squad' to prevent trouble. That police unit won't be patrolling your neighbourhood to keep you safe from harm. Rather, it will be tasked with scouring social media for protest pre-crime, monitoring your opinions for anti-migrant sentiment. The police might not have enough resources to deal with shoplifting. They might not have solved a single theft or burglary, or recover a stolen bike, across a third of England. But we are to believe they have resources for what really counts: scrutinising your views for wrongthink. The current state of affairs is so absurd that simply writing it down feels almost subversive. But each element is true: we do appear to have flown unvetted Taliban members into Britain. The Government really will be watching your posts for signs of dissent. This isn't some accident, some Civil Service blunder. It's by design. It truly appears that Labour's strategy is to impose ever more restrictions on the freedoms of the law-abiding, in the hope that eventually people will acquiesce with a resigned shrug. The problem is that it isn't working. The population is fed up with being punished for doing the right thing. The hectoring about slavery, imperialism, war and all the other iniquities of history used to justify sacrificing our comforts and liberties on the altar of mass migration is no longer having the desired effect. British citizens living today did not build the empire. They didn't enslave anyone. Why should they foot the bill for housing illegal migrants up in four star hotels in central London? Why should they put up with them working in the shadow economy? Unfortunately for the Government, the previously silent majority is beginning to vocally express its frustration. MPs and ministers are fearful that the country is becoming a 'tinderbox'. But even this isn't enough to convince them that we must change course. Why? Perhaps because doing so would be an admission of past failures. For decades we were told that mass migration was an unalloyed good while critics were denounced as bigots. To concede, after all this time, that it has not come without costs – at times intolerable costs – would be catastrophically damaging to the political class. The pro-migration fanatics, who promised to control numbers while throwing open our borders, who overrode objections to impose their policies despite what they were repeatedly being told at the ballot box, would be discredited. So instead, the state appears to be passing through the stages of grief. At first there was denial that people were worried about migration at all; Brexit had allowed us to be liberals. Then there was anger after Southport, with Starmer's denunciation of the 'thugs' taking to the streets. Now we seem to have reached bargaining: if we can stop people talking about it, perhaps they'll stop caring? It was a strategy that might have worked prior to the social media era, and in particular prior to Elon Musk's buyout of Twitter. Now, even the censorship of protest videos, arrest of people for incendiary content, and threat of mass scanning of output isn't sufficient to quell dissent. And though many of the protests now cropping up across Britain are peaceful, shows of police force are not enough to deter outside agitators from hijacking them. Tiff Lynch, the head of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, last week warned that officers were being 'pulled in every direction' and commanders were 'forced to choose between keeping the peace at home or plugging national gaps'. Where do we go from here? As the costs of legal migration become apparent, with talk of labour market infusions and attracting the 'best and brightest' seeming increasingly hollow, overall numbers must be reduced. As the impact of illegal migration becomes clearer, the establishment must stop trying to guilt us into acceptance, and finally stop the influx. It's highly doubtful Yvette Cooper has the will or the way. The Home Secretary would prefer to silence opponents, by censoring and arresting those who speak out.
South Wales Argus
7 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Tories would ban doctors' strikes, Badenoch says
The Tory leader said that her party would introduce primary legislation to block medics from taking widespread industrial action, placing the same restrictions on them that apply to police officers and soldiers. Thousands of resident doctors, previously known as junior doctors, began a five-day walkout on Friday after relations between the Government and British Medical Association (BMA) soured over a dispute about pay. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has said the union will not be allowed to 'hold the country to ransom' after receiving a 28.9% pay award over the last three years, the highest across the public sector. The BMA says, despite this uplift, pay for resident doctors has declined by a fifth since 2008 once inflation is taken into account. NHS resident doctors outside Bristol Royal Infirmary (Ben Birchall/PA) On Saturday, the Conservatives said they would reintroduce minimum service level requirements, which were brought in by the previous government and scrapped by Labour, across the health service. Mrs Badenoch said: 'The BMA has become militant, these strikes are going too far, and it is time for action. 'Doctors do incredibly important work. 'Medicine is a vocation, not just a job. 'That is why in government we offered a fair deal that supported doctors, but protected taxpayers too.' She said the Tories were 'making an offer in the national interest, we will work with the Government to face down the BMA to help protect patients and the NHS.' Patients have been urged to attend appointments unless told otherwise while the action is ongoing, with NHS England saying hospitals are aiming to reschedule any cancellations due to strikes within two weeks. Mr Streeting has warned of a challenging few days for the health service but said 'we are doing everything we can to minimise' harm.
