or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at School › Sex education: Should it be taught in schools?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sex education: Should it be taught in schools? - Page 3

post #41 of 115

Just noting a few more things. First, method of BC (hormonal/IUDs) that are exclusively female and do NOT prevent STIs actually INCREASE STIs, in two ways. They are documented, heavily documented to reduce condom use in every study on the subject. There is also some idea, especially with Depo Provera, that the hormones alter the Yoni to make the entire region more susceptible to STI acquisition upon exposure. So the idea that all Sex Ed would prevent STIs is not exactly correct, because women could be encouraged to engage in behavior that actually increases the incidence.

 

I just read a little on Kinsey, who is the 'father' of modern 'comprehensive Sex Ed' and WOW! He was soooooo perverted and sick, and there is ample evidence he was seeking, in his 'research' to normalize his abnormal behavior. He was actually making porn in the attic of his family home, with his staff AND subjects, in the name of 'science'? I am on team 'throw out the totality of that man's research right now!' He makes anything Wakefield was ever accused of look like child's play! 

 

Also I want to note that *I* was exposed to bestiality @ approximately age 8 through the famous 'My Secret Garden' by Nancy Friday, purchased by my mother, @ the mall. I didn't have her permission to read it, but that is what happens when you keep p*rnographic books in your family home & sell them @ regular book stores. I remember thinking to myself, 'that's it, there it goes, my innocence is totally gone'. I definitely felt maimed by reading that chapter.

post #42 of 115
Quote:
 Are their opinions actually being shoved down his throat? As in, if he raises questions and opinions about abstinence, he's being told he's wrong and abnormal

 

I, personally, have seen this sort of thing in sex-ed.  I've witnessed several teachers saying something along the lines of "We don't discuss abstinence."  It's not quite the same as telling someone he is wrong or abnormal, but I can see how it would lead said child to think that way.  I'm sure the teachers mean well and aren't promoting sexual behavior, but when a discussion of abstinence gets shoved aside, well, it's another piece of the whole sex ed puzzle thrown out.

post #43 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

Just noting a few more things. First, method of BC (hormonal/IUDs) that are exclusively female and do NOT prevent STIs actually INCREASE STIs, in two ways. They are documented, heavily documented to reduce condom use in every study on the subject. There is also some idea, especially with Depo Provera, that the hormones alter the Yoni to make the entire region more susceptible to STI acquisition upon exposure. So the idea that all Sex Ed would prevent STIs is not exactly correct, because women could be encouraged to engage in behavior that actually increases the incidence.

 

I just read a little on Kinsey, who is the 'father' of modern 'comprehensive Sex Ed' and WOW! He was soooooo perverted and sick, and there is ample evidence he was seeking, in his 'research' to normalize his abnormal behavior. He was actually making porn in the attic of his family home, with his staff AND subjects, in the name of 'science'? I am on team 'throw out the totality of that man's research right now!' He makes anything Wakefield was ever accused of look like child's play! 

 

Also I want to note that *I* was exposed to bestiality @ approximately age 8 through the famous 'My Secret Garden' by Nancy Friday, purchased by my mother, @ the mall. I didn't have her permission to read it, but that is what happens when you keep p*rnographic books in your family home & sell them @ regular book stores. I remember thinking to myself, 'that's it, there it goes, my innocence is totally gone'. I definitely felt maimed by reading that chapter.

 

You bring up some important faults with the current sex ed programs in your posts, Dina.  Why is it that we should allow PP and the pharma companies free access to our daughters and their bodies?  I personally feel it would be incredibly valuable for older teens to learn about NFP as an alternative to using potentially harmful forms of BC like the pill, the Depo-Provera shot, and Implanon.  I sometimes wonder if hormonal BC isn't just a wide-ranging medical experiment on women..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Backroads View Post

 

I, personally, have seen this sort of thing in sex-ed.  I've witnessed several teachers saying something along the lines of "We don't discuss abstinence."  It's not quite the same as telling someone he is wrong or abnormal, but I can see how it would lead said child to think that way.  I'm sure the teachers mean well and aren't promoting sexual behavior, but when a discussion of abstinence gets shoved aside, well, it's another piece of the whole sex ed puzzle thrown out.

 

I don't have a problem with a well-rounded sex ed program that increases in maturity with the child.  However, I see no benefit in teaching a 2nd grader how to use a condom, or any discussion of the sexual perversions mentioned in previous responses (i.e. bestiality, fisting, etc.).  I do believe that exposing children to sexual ideas they aren't ready to process can be emotionally damaging.  I, personally, would have benefited from a frank discussion of the emotional aspects of sexual behavior at an early age (which didn't happen until I attended a family planning education class in my junior year at a Catholic high school).  I do think abstinence should be encouraged and discussed positively.  

post #44 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree View Post


I'm going to assume that you didn't notice which forum you are posting in. This is the Learning at School forum. We're talking about school programs. 
Well, actually I didn't see that. I arrived at the thread via the MDC newsletter link. However, just because my kids are currently homeschooled doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on the subject. The sex ed program in our local schools is one reason why we choose to homeschool, that's how strongly I am opposed to their approach. And judging by the statistics for our state on abortion, unplanned pregnancy, diseases, and sexual crimes, their approach hasn't helped at all. Im hoping things are better in other places in the country, as some other posts have indicated.
post #45 of 115
I once had the awkward experience of having to teach sex Ed to (mostly) teenage boys!

I think it's important because once kids hit puberty, they start fooling around, and without good information, they tend to make pretty dumb choices. Had a lot of STDs in the school population according to the nurses on staff, yikes!
post #46 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by moominmamma View Post

 

[...]

 

If you assume all kids can and will abstain from sex until marriage, and you're wrong in a few cases, what are the negative repercussions? STIs, unwanted pregnancies, abortions.

[...]

 

 

I'd also like to point out that even if every single person in the world did abstain until their marriage, it still wouldn't remove the need for people to know about contraception, or about issues of consent to sex, both of which I consider to be very important parts of sex education. Even among people who believe in abstaining until marriage, only a minority also hold the belief that contraception other than NFP is wrong, and marriage doesn't automatically mean that a couple are in a position to have a baby. As for issues around consent, I think that should be an issue for everyone to know more about.

post #47 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillyjonk View Post

" The whole point of parenting is to first teach your children your views, your values, and to have someone else force you to teach them otherwise is against everything you believe in."

 

I disagree. My kids are not my property, to do as I wish with. They are not receptacles for my views. My job is to guide them to views that work for them and decisions that work for them.  

 

I agree that part of parenting would tend to be to share your whole view. But the whole point? No. My children are people in their own right, and it is so important to me to respect that. My rights as a parent to pass on my views absolutely do not trump their rights to clear and impartial information.

 

For me,a child/young adult's right to impartial information about their own bodies is a really fundamental one. 

Fillyjonk thumb.gif Love it, probably because I see it the same way! This is my favorite part My rights as a parent to pass on my views absolutely do not trump their rights to clear and impartial information.

 

Why do we need sex ed in schools? Because not everyone is learning about it at home. Here are some examples:

 

I have a 25 year old female friend who didn't know that the umbilical cord connected to the baby via the abdomen and that is why we have belly buttons.

 

I have a 65 year old female coworker who didn't know that a baby grows in the uterus.

 

I have another female coworker age 39 who didn't know that you could feel the uterus or fundus (or even what a fundus is) as a pregnancy progresses.

 

My mom thought that your belly button was and inny or an outty based on how well the doctor "tied the cord".

 

I have a friend who was having her third baby and had no idea how the amniotic sac, umbilical cord, or placenta attached to her body or the baby. I was at her birth and it was hilarious when she asked the doc to show her. She and I had many conversations about it and she wanted to see it for herself. The doc showed her and explained it but seem baffled that she would care about something other than just the newborn.

 

People still go around not knowing that you can get STDs from oral or that douche after sex doesn't prevent pregnancy. There is SO much misinformation that I think it's a public health issue and that's it's imperative to teach it in schools. My vote is for all students to learn about puberty and not just about their gender, NFP, barrier methods, hormonal methods, STDs, pregnancy, fetal development, childbirth, menopause ALL the pros, cons, side effects. Gay and lesbian students need to know about barrier methods and that just because they have risked out of pregnancy doesn't mean that they have risked out of STDs.  Fetishes and illegal sex acts (I saw beastiality mentioned) belong in a psychology class.

 

I home birth and my kids started their sex education at a very young age. No questions at my house about how babies get out winky.gif When my DD went to a sleep over at 8 years old she stood her ground when all the other little girls insisted that babies come out of the butt. My DD was adamant that they come out of the vagina and that she had seen it LOL One of the girl's moms was pregnant and the girls were discussing it so that's how the topic came up.

 

Just my 2cents.gif

post #48 of 115
Teaching human anatomy & 'sex Ed' are really not the same subject.

If contraception could be taught in a non-biased way, I would be fine with it, but today IMO it is taught in a very PharmaSalesPitch sort of way & much of the info on it presented to teen women is very biased.
post #49 of 115

dinahx, I am not in the US but in the UK where afaik there is not a problem with pharmaceutical sale pitches. We have a totally different medical set up here, you don't get to request what drugs you get from your GP and direct marketing by pharma to patients is forbidden, I think. Its not done, anyway. So there's no space for this to be a problem. Most contraception is prescribed and you take what you get.

 

So my question would be, given that I assume that this is being done in schools, by teachers or possibly school nurses, is the pharmaceutical marketing thing really a big problem and how big a problem is it?

 

I agree that would irk me. I would absolutely not pull my kid from classes on this but I would be very unimpressed. And I still think its a lot better than no info/playground info which is what some kids get. But it would be pretty annoying.

post #50 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

Teaching human anatomy & 'sex Ed' are really not the same subject.

 

I think this is probably true BUT it really depends on where you live and the cultural perspective in the area. Human anatomy that included, gasp, the reproductive system would very much be viewed as sex ed by some people. shrug.gif

post #51 of 115
I'd rather my child learn about reproduction & STIs from a Biology professor than a guidance counselor IMO & that is who typically teaches Sex Ed.

I not sure the UK system is ideal either: women have to just 'take what they get'? Y'all have way more IUDs than us, so your provider just picks one for you? I'd like to see true informed consent with the women in the drivers seat!

Almost everything written for mass consumption on Contraception in the US is permeated with bias: they play up protection from rare cancers, while downplaying increases in common ones, there is a systematic de-emphasis on side effects/adverse events, etc.
post #52 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihave7kids View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree View Post


I'm going to assume that you didn't notice which forum you are posting in. This is the Learning at School forum. We're talking about school programs. 
Well, actually I didn't see that. I arrived at the thread via the MDC newsletter link. However, just because my kids are currently homeschooled doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on the subject. The sex ed program in our local schools is one reason why we choose to homeschool, that's how strongly I am opposed to their approach. And judging by the statistics for our state on abortion, unplanned pregnancy, diseases, and sexual crimes, their approach hasn't helped at all. Im hoping things are better in other places in the country, as some other posts have indicated.
 

When we are discussing school programs, it is unhelpful to drop into the conversation and basically say "and that's why I'm glad to be homeschooling":    

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihave7kids View Post

Wow! There are some widely divergent opinions here. I'm finding it fascinating to read them all, and I am so glad to be homeschooling my children. As a homeschooling mom, I am able to decide when each child is ready to progress in each subject, including sex ed

 

Imagine if every thread in the Learning at Home and Beyond forum had responses like that to every concern from homeschooling parents. It would be tiresome to hear "and that's why I am glad that I send my kids to school" and "as a schooling mom, I have all these resources and benefits that I can access for my kids" or "as a schooling mom, we don't have to deal with that....." The gist of the response is basically "don't homeschool". Not really helpful to a conversation being hosted in a place where it's understood that the discussion is not about going to school.  

 

You raised an interesting issue about when a child is ready to participate in a sex education class. It's just that it would be worthwhile exploring how that could be dealt with in the school context. Perhaps there is a different method of delivering sex education information, along with other health-related information, so that it is more flexible and accommodating to a child's individual development. In a traditional single age/grade class format, all the students get the same information when they reach a certain grade. I can envision a different kind of program, although it would be complicated to implement. There would be a mulit-level "Healthy Lifestyles" program, perhaps held once a week. It would be multi-disciplinary (biology, phys.ed and guidance) and not necessarily grade specific. There would be different levels for the type and complexity of the information provided. The teachers and parents could decide what level a student attended. Probably most students would attend with their grade-mates but if it was somehow preferable for a student to attend a different level, then they could.  I suppose this is a complicated form of "opt out" and I think eventually, by the time they graduated, all students should get all of the information or demonstrate that they had already learned it elsewhere. It might be a compromise for those parents who don't think their children are ready yet. Also, this all off the top of my head, so aside from complicated implementation of multi-grade classes, there's probably all sorts of problems I haven't considered with this kind of sex education program delivery. 

post #53 of 115
Thread Starter 
I think "gang banging" or gang rape, should be taught about in high school. High school kids need to have a very good understanding of what coonsent means, and taht if a girl passes out at a party she isn't fair game. I think consent should be a top priority in sex ed.
post #54 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraCH View Post

I'm sorry for those of you who had bad experiences with religion and a lack of sex ed, but that is not the case for all people of faith.  We are Roman Catholic and we talk very openly and frankly to our children about sex.  We teach abstinence and we teach that birth control is a sin for Catholics.  That said, we also teach grace and forgiveness.  They know they could come to us even if they make a mistake. 

 

Abstinence is not just a religious thing.  There are serious psychological and emotional, even physical consequences to sex at a young age.  I think it is insane and irresponsible to teach 15 and 16 year olds how to have "safe sex". 

I completely disagree...I think it's irresponsible to not teach 15 year olds how to have safe sex. Regardless of how you feel about it, it may happen, unless you literally keep them by your side every moment until they are married. I grew up in an abstinence only home, I was having sex at 16, and my parents had absolutely no idea (and I'm sure they thought they kept me on a very short leash). 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillyjonk View Post
To my mind the same really applies to straight teenagers. They are going to have sex, most teenagers do. The issue is more the culture in which this tends to occur for teenagers is not really an accepting, non-coercive one, especially for girls. So you can give them the information they need to make it as safe, as consensual and as positive as possible. You can make sure that they know that sleeping around is a bad idea in terms of STDs, and what to do if they have put themselves at risk. You can give them a vocabulary to extricate themselves from situations and you can tell them what adult life looks like, that this little high school bubble of needing to be accepted really doesn't last. But telling them to say no or wait til marriage doesn't work, and doesn't give them the information they need to live their actual lives as safely as possible. And its a bonus that, where non judgmental, information based programs exist, STD and teenage pregnancy rates tend to be lower and age of first intercourse higher. 

 

I don't know why a 9th grader should not know about fisting (why is that not something we can talk about? I'll put a little asterix in if that helps anyone ROTFLMAO.gif). A 9th grader is 14/15, right? That doesn't seem to me to be too young to know about this and I'd guess a lot of kids of that age do. Sure I did.It doesn't seem like the most out there sexual practice to me, especially given that 50 Shades of Grey (a crime against literature IMO) is available in every bookshop right now at kid eye level.  I'm wondering if, assuming it came from a teacher not the school yard, it might have been an answer to a question another kid asked, in which case I'm all for giving honest answers. 

I agree that fisting, and other "out there" sexual practices, should not be taboo to answer questions about. I'm sure most teenagers have heard of the act. 14 and 15 year olds are not little children. I also completely agree with teaching consent, because I think that's a huge issue that should be addressed in age appropriate forms from the time children are young. I will wish for the rest of my life that someone had taught me about proper consent as a child, and I feel like I would be doing my daughter, and any future children, a huge disservice to not teach them about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillyjonk View Post

" The whole point of parenting is to first teach your children your views, your values, and to have someone else force you to teach them otherwise is against everything you believe in."

 

I disagree. My kids are not my property, to do as I wish with. They are not receptacles for my views. My job is to guide them to views that work for them and decisions that work for them.  

 

I agree that part of parenting would tend to be to share your whole view. But the whole point? No. My children are people in their own right, and it is so important to me to respect that. My rights as a parent to pass on my views absolutely do not trump their rights to clear and impartial information.

 

For me,a child/young adult's right to impartial information about their own bodies is a really fundamental one. For two reasons. First, to keep them safe. I think its uncontroversiale to say that kids who have had access to frank, impartial sex education are far and away at less risk of abuse than kids who have been protected from this information. Early and honest sex education also correlates to deferment of sexual activity in teens. Obviously the ideal here is a parent without hang ups or, with a good relationship with their kids and a willingness to be honest, but not all kids have access to this and in its absence I would far rather see all kids have access to a failsafe program through schools than rely on the school yard and what people who do not have their interests at heart may say. 

 

 

...

 

I have to say, I also think to expect 15 year old boy not to know about a range of sexual practices seems a little optimistic to me. If there is clear evidence that the teacher is encouraging the kids to experiment with bestiality then that probably needs to be discussed with the school, but I'd be very sure that no wires had been crossed first.

Yes, to everything you said. It actually strikes me as a little creepy to say "the whole point" of parenting is to teach your child your views and values. Your children are not your clones...they are their own people, who will someday be adults with their own views and opinions. Of course you will shape those- but your job is not to make sure they see everything just like you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pattimomma View Post
Why do we need sex ed in schools? Because not everyone is learning about it at home. Here are some examples:

 

I have a 25 year old female friend who didn't know that the umbilical cord connected to the baby via the abdomen and that is why we have belly buttons.

 

I have a 65 year old female coworker who didn't know that a baby grows in the uterus.

 

I have another female coworker age 39 who didn't know that you could feel the uterus or fundus (or even what a fundus is) as a pregnancy progresses.

 

My mom thought that your belly button was and inny or an outty based on how well the doctor "tied the cord".

 

I have a friend who was having her third baby and had no idea how the amniotic sac, umbilical cord, or placenta attached to her body or the baby. I was at her birth and it was hilarious when she asked the doc to show her. She and I had many conversations about it and she wanted to see it for herself. The doc showed her and explained it but seem baffled that she would care about something other than just the newborn.

I had a 30 year old friend ask me many questions about menstrual cycles that shocked me, such as "Do you ovulate right before or right after your period?". 

post #55 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

I have a serious issue with SexEd being turned into a Pharmaception & PP sales pitch. Just like AF education in schools is 'sponsored by Tampax'. Do y'all see that is *just* as offensive as any religious POV?

It is corporate & it is anti-feminist as women are encouraged to bear the risk burden by taking hormones, placing devices, getting shots, etc.

I went to Catholic school & was taught NFP in Senior Year religion class. That knowledge, about my body & my cycle has served me WAY better than a sales pitch for synthetic estrogen would have! As far as STDs go: I learned about those in Biology.

I believe that Sex Ed as conceived by PP & pals actively limits women's choices & stunts their own understanding of their bodies.

I am all for STD education, I am all for CONDOM education. I am not a fan of education on perversions & way out practices that can damage the body tho . . .


What kind of "perversions and way out practices that can damage the body" do they teach in sex ed?

 

And I guess whatever birth control method you use is up to you and more power to you.  I actually agree with you and wish kids were taught about the female cycle, cervical fluid, and how to prevent pregnancy through FAM.  However I also think they need to be presented with all their options including hormonal birth control and decide what is right for them.  I personally have used "hormones, devices, and shots" (all three actually...) not because I didn't know or understand the risks but because the risks of not taking them outweighed the risks of taking them to me, and to this day I feel they were the right choice for me. 

 

And in response to this whole thread: I guess my $.02 is that sex ed is no more likely to make a kid have sex than driver's ed is more likely to make a kid drive a car.  It just means they're more likely to do it safely.  I believe the study I read on Abstinence only education said that kids who took it only waited an average of six months longer than kids who took comprehensive sex ed and they were much less likely to use condoms or birth control.   And to me, that's just not worth it.

 

I also think that sex ed classes need to address the issue of consent and when it is and isn't okay to have sex with someone (ie fall down drunk) and getting an enthusiastic yes from someone rather than just a lack of protest. Because it seems like time and again we see people who truly don't understand what consent is supposed to look like.

 

And last of all, I wish someone would tell kids that sex is supposed to feel good, it's supposed to be joyful and if it doesn't feel good and you don't enjoy it than something is wrong.  That's the message I want my children to take away from their sex education (that and how to have sex safely and not create people they aren't able to care for).


Edited by gypsymama2008 - 8/28/13 at 9:17pm
post #56 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillyjonk View Post

dinahx, I am not in the US but in the UK where afaik there is not a problem with pharmaceutical sale pitches. We have a totally different medical set up here, you don't get to request what drugs you get from your GP and direct marketing by pharma to patients is forbidden, I think. Its not done, anyway. So there's no space for this to be a problem. Most contraception is prescribed and you take what you get.

 

Good grief - as a GP in the UK, I can say that I sincerely hope the 'you take what you get' attitude is unusual among doctors! No, you can't just walk in and expect to get whatever medication you ask for in the same way as you would expect to get the items you order from a shop, because the doctor is going to take medical appropriateness and, yes, cost-effectiveness into account. But a doctor certainly should be discussing the pros and cons of different options with you, especially with something as personal as contraception. I would always do this with a patient requesting contraception. If you feel your doctor is expecting you to take a contraceptive that isn't really suiting you, without discussion of the options, then I would recommend trying to see a different GP or going to your local family planning clinic.

post #57 of 115
Sex outside of a committed relationship doesn't typically feel that great, so telling children it is supposed to is misleading as is selling the notion of 'safe sex'. I managed to get the 'safe sex' sales pitch from the media despite not having secular Sex Ed & guess what? Every time I tried to have this so called 'safe sex', it seemed to me to have VERY unsafe moments. Safer sex is the correct term. Condoms break & HPV can be transmitted despite condoms, plus force happens in intimate settings, especially when alcohol & drugs are involved. My mother was an HIV nurse when I was in HS. So my goal was 100% 'do not contract HIV'. 'Safe Sex' seemed to me to still leave holes plenty wide enough for the virus in my life. I found it best to avoid those situations entirely, because of the science of disease transmission, not a dusty & archaic moral principle.

And MANY sexual practices that y'all want introduced in HS classrooms can damage the body, even relatively common ones, ask a doctor.

No method of contraception is 100% either, so telling young people 'do this & you absolutely will never create a life' is also a less than accurate sales pitch . . . Not even sterilization can offer that assurance.
post #58 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree View Post

When we are discussing school programs, it is unhelpful to drop into the conversation and basically say "and that's why I'm glad to be homeschooling":    

 

 

Imagine if every thread in the Learning at Home and Beyond forum had responses like that to every concern from homeschooling parents. It would be tiresome to hear "and that's why I am glad that I send my kids to school" and "as a schooling mom, I have all these resources and benefits that I can access for my kids" or "as a schooling mom, we don't have to deal with that....." The gist of the response is basically "don't homeschool". Not really helpful to a conversation being hosted in a place where it's understood that the discussion is not about going to school.  

Thanks Ollyoxenfree. We have very few guidelines about manners here in LAS, but that one does seem to irk just about everyone!!

 

Understandable though when someone comes here from a link and doesn't realize where they are! 

 

Ihave7kids, welcome and hope you can find your way around ok!

post #59 of 115

In an ideal world, sex ed in schools would be unnecessary, as kids would get all the appropriate and necessary information. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen - for any number of reasons. So sex ed in the schools is needed. 

 

In our district, sex ed falls under the Health umbrella (which starts in 1st grade), and is taught by the PE teachers. Everything is pretty much age-appropriate, informative w/o pushing one agenda or another. Abstinence was included - as an option. And I believe that's appropriate. Kids shouldn't be made to feel that "everyone is doing it" and they're weird if they're not. Consent should definitely be included. 

 

My one objection to how they handed things was with the stupid fake baby thing. Each kid had to keep the baby for one night. Really? Teaches nothing. Make them keep the "kid" for a week. ANd make sure the darn thing works. 

post #60 of 115

Are PE teachers really qualified to teach about Human Anatomy & Reproductive Biology? Or the mechanisms of the Female Ovulatory Cycle? Or pharmaceutical adverse effects (I know, those aren't on the curriculum, I am sure!)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Learning at School
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at School › Sex education: Should it be taught in schools?