Search This Blog

Monday, 18 March 2013

A glimpse at the "sex-ed`' movement in the UK

I went to a talk recently, by Louise Kirk - author of a new book called "Sexuality Explained - a guide for parents and children" (published by Gracewing -

Louise Kirk is a mother to four children and she was also a parent governor of her children's Church of England primary school. It was while she was a governor that she learnt of the new sex education which was being introduced nationally.

Why was sex education introduced? Primarily as a tool to bring down teenage pregnancies. The obstretritrian and gynaecological department  were pushing for this rather than school teachers.

A bit of history - free birth control became free for all in 1974.

In 1991 a report was compiled on the alarming rise in teen pregnancies - which pressurised for sex education. In 1999 the numbers were so bad that Tony Blair lamented the UK being amongst the highest for teen mothers - saying it was shameful. Around this time STIs (sexually transmitted infections) soared.

The policy of handing out free birth control for all was deemed a failure - instead of bringing down unwanted pregnancies (not just in teenagers but older women too) - it had the opposite effect - the pregnancies soared.

Why had this policy failed?

Apparently teenagers don't like the idea of birth control devices (spoils the fun - they say). Teenage drunkenness also makes them less inhibited to indulge in risky behaviour, plus they are too inebriated
to bother with precautions. Girls often forget to 'take the pill'. The other factor is that teenage girls want babies - in some areas it is considered 'cool' to be a teenage mum. There is no longer any stigma attached to unmarried mothers - which there was in the 1960s. Teenage mothers often come from broken homes and having a baby gives them something to cling to.

So who actually produces sex-ed materials? It is companies with vested interests - such as the pharmaceutical companies (the pill, morning-after pill etc) . Durex too has a vested interest and they sponsor some materials - as do Proctor and Gamble. There is a body called the "sex-ed forum" -
comprising of 8 people - they too make materials. The ideology behind sex-ed is to take away all natural modesty and remove any religious barriers. This removal of any religious framework becomes in itself part of the secular creed - a new religion without God.

Pressurising young girls to indulge in sexual activity affects them hugely when the relationship finishes. Studies show that they get depressed which can lead to drink and drugs. Each broken relationship further damages their ability to bond.

So what is the answer?

Louise Kirk says good sex-ed is what is needed - one that preserves modesty and teaches one to have the courage and confidence to say no. This makes a person stronger in all areas of life. She recommends a good programme called - "Alive to the World" by Christine Volmer. It started in Latin America and the website address is It is suitable for home and school use.

"Sexuality explained`' complements "Alive to the world". It takes the form of a fictional story which takes away any embarrassment. There are 5 chapters for girls, 4 for boys and 2 for both. It includes menstruation and STIs. It has whole page illustrations  by Jessie Gillick. Louise Kirk also made sure it was biologically correct by getting doctors to thoroughly vet it.

Here are some sobering statistics

If you only indulge in sexual activity with the person you marry - you are 80% more likely to remain married to that person. Add another sexual partner and you have a 57% chance of staying married. The more sexual partners you have the less likely you are to stay married.

AddThis Smart Layers