Sex education should not be taught in schools because every child is different

The argument

In a school setting, a sex education class will be inserted into a curriculum which dictates that every child should learn about the same topic at the same time. That is how school works, and for most subjects it is a reasonable arrangement: a syllabus has to be planned for a year group rather than for an individual, and lessons are delivered to a room rather than to a person. While this may work with subjects like maths and science, it does not work with sexual education. The difference is not the difficulty of the material but what readiness for it depends on. A pupil who is not ready for algebra finds it hard and returns to it later, at no cost beyond the difficulty. Sex education is different because children and teenagers physically develop at different rates, and the material is addressed to that development rather than to a level of prior study. The consequence is that one lesson cannot suit a whole class. While one child may appreciate learning about contraceptive methods at 13 or 14, another child may find the topic distressing and would be better off waiting until they are older. A timetable cannot accommodate both: it must pick a date, and whichever date it picks will be too early for some of the children in the room. By putting sex education under a school's purview, children may be exposed to sexual themes before they are ready. Making it the responsibility of the parents avoids the problem at its source. A parent sees the individual child rather than the year group, can judge when that child is ready, and can return to the subject as the child's questions change. Making it the responsibility of the parents will mean that a child can receive the necessary education at the right time for them. Because every child is different, sex education should not be taught in schools.

Context

Teaching sex education in schools means every child is exposed to the same sexual themes at the same age. This one-size-fits-all approach is a dangerous way to teach sex education and makes no allowances for the different rates at which children sexually mature.

Premises

Counter-arguments

The notion that the parent will be able to accurately determine when a child needs to receive information on contraceptive options and the importance of engaging in safe sex is fundamentally flawed. Teenagers are notoriously disengaged from their parents and are unwilling to share details about their lives— particularly the details surrounding love and relationships. Making the parents the gatekeepers of that information, who often see their teenagers as much younger and more innocent forms of themselves than they actually are, could leave teenagers in the dark about safe sex for too long. Just because one teenager didn’t receive a sex education lesson from their parents or their teachers, they won’t be exposed to the information. Teenagers talk. By taking the teachers out of the equation, the only thing that will happen is the teenagers will look to their friends for information. When this happens, there is no way of controlling the information they receive. If one student knows more than the others, they will share. This is how misinformation spreads. Teenagers may turn to pornography to glean a better understanding of sexual relationships, which will likely be far more damaging than a simple sex education class. With a comprehensive sex education program in schools, teachers and parents can ensure that every child receives accurate information.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P3] Children will be exposed to sexual themes regardless of whether or not the school is teaching them.