Please note that I am not suggesting he should NOT have attended the Remembrance Day services.  I am only suggesting that introducing a four year old to the concepts of war, death and violence (on a grand scale) is probably MORE disturbing that telling him that he urinates from something called a "penis".

Parents are furious they weren't consulted about the new sex ed program.  But yet I was not consulted when my son was shown a video documenting the abuse of children and women in specific Middle East countries.  He had nightmares for days. 

But yet, discussing consensual loving relationships and identifying that we are all unique individuals who explore our uniqueness in a variety of ways is somehow offensive.  SHEESH.

My point is that publicly funded schools introduce our children to a range of highly sensitive material in age-appropriate ways.  Sexual health is, and should be, one of those topics.

Couldn't agree more, specialmom.  Those that think that it's too early are either blinded to what their children are already exposed to or to far removed from the situation.  one of the more controversial topics seems to be masturbation taught in grade 6.  By age 12, kids know all about touching themselves.  Teaching them that it is dirty and should never be discussed as part of a healthy sexual identity does so much harm, IMO.

We have explained all of these topics to our children (certainly earlier than grade 6) because we want them to be comfortable with their bodies and their sexuality...cms

i have seen interviews with convicted pedophiles where they say that the kids they tend to go after are the ones who don't know the anatomical names penis and vagina.... they know that a kid who has been taught to call it somethine else, like a 'wee-wee', doesn't have much knowledge on sexuality, and therefore its easier for them to 'normalize' sexual encounters with them.  they also said that kids who are embarrassed to talk about their sexuality are easy targets as well, because the chances of them discussing what is happening with their parents is very low.

personally, i'd suggest that particular point needs to be addressed... obviously we cannot protect our child from every child predator out there.  the LEAST we can do for them is make them less of a target, imho.  and THAT is what this will accomplish.

I agree with you two. It sounds like a good intiative. When children are given the proper information they are safer. Meg Hickling is a nurse educator who has won awards for her sex ed programs. She states that when children know the proper terminology they are less likely to be sexually abused because the average abuser knows they learned the language from someone they love. Also, discussing issues related to sex lets the child know they can talk about it IF something does happen to them.

DO these people not want their children to be safe?

Hey sighs, great minds think alike.

Some people seem to think that by not teaching kids about sexuality it will prevent them from coming up with the idea for themselves.  I think that people who actually believe that verge on being to stupid to live.  I think Ontario's initiative is a very very good thing.

I like the content but I worry about the delivery.  I know that when I was in elementary school, the teachers were just as uncomfortable teaching it as we were learning it.  These topics (like every other class) need to be taught by educators who are trained to do so.  Personal experience with masturbation, safe sex, etc. is not enough to consider a phys. ed. teacher "qualified" to lead a class on the subject.

 I am torn.

My kids did a very complete sex ed program at school in 4, 5, 6.  There were parental meetings to cover the content and raise objections ( private school always consult parents)

But the big thing was that they hired outside staff to come in and do it. Skilled people who had alot of training in sex, adolesents, had no issues of embarrassment......

I simply can't see how a teacher does this as yet another part of their job.

I also am a bit concerned that for children who are less mature or shy there will be the issue of emotional upset and embarrassment.  

I do agree that alot of issues can be talked about at very young ages and can be introduced into the curriculum.  But by who?  the math teacher?  the gym teacher?  the science teacher?

It would be nice that the next generation won't be as ignorant one way to break the cycle

In a rosy world, all parents would teach their kids all sorts of good things - like sex ed, equality, love for neighbour, etc.  And they'd do a brilliant job of it.  And pigs would fly.  The world ain't rosy.

I support the curriculum. 

And, the premier caved.  Spineless bastard.  Yet another victory for the closed minded and ignorant.

www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/04/22/sex-ed.html

I'm two provinces away.  I was glancing through the morning paper and saw the headline (on an inside page) and flipped by it because (1) I had other things to do, (2) I don't live in Ontario (3) I am not a parent of elementary aged children (just a grandparent). 

That afternoon a woman in her 80s approached me at bowling.  Had I read the article?  They are going to teach grade 1 kids how to masterbate and have oral sex.  Isn't that terrible?   Again I said I hadn't read it, but that I would - and it was my turn to bowl. 

That evening I read that they will be teaching Grade 6 or 12 year olds about (not how to) masterbation and oral sex.  I have no problem with that.  They've already probably been masterbating for a few years, but may not have known it had a name.  Oral sex - its a reality that kids in junior high may be expermenting with it. 

But yes, it needs a trained teacher. 

I remember in grade 8 being taught by the gym teacher with the girls separated from the boys that our 'bodies were changing and maturing and that soon we would begin menstrating'.  About two years too late for some of us, with some inaccurate information, and a lot of embarassment on the part of the teacher and us girls.  We were given no information about what the boys might be experiencing as their 'bodies grew and matured' - nor did they know about us - except for whispered jokes and giggles.

 I am totally for the new sex ed curriculum for the exact reasons Sighsnootles said - Also, I'm still fairly young, and I remember knowing lots of the 'inappropriate' sexual terms before or around grade 3, and I doubt much has changed... introducing a proper course to give the real information is what kids need.. Maybe not learning much about it in grade 1, but a little more each year.. instead of how I had it - about 2-3 classes in grades 6,7, and 8 each which resulted in my learning and laughing at the word "ejaculation" and not much more...

Beshpin.

I accept the fact that you would prefer to educate your children about sex at home.   That is your choice.  Please don't imply that it should be my choice as well.  Sex is not a taboo subject in our home and therefore a healthy and supportive conversation about sex outside of the home (i.e. at school) is not something we have a problem with if it is done in an appropriate and constructive manner.  This is not meant to imply that sex ed does not happen in our home as well.  You certainly would have the option to remove your children from the sex ed program.

One of my points however is, that school introduces a range of sensitive topics that include violence, war, death and human rights abuses at equally young ages, with people who perhaps are also ill equipped to handle the fall-out from such sensitive topics.  The Terry Schiavo incident in the news had my very sensitive son in tears for days.  He was convinced that the government was going to run around unplugging feeding tubes, letting people die against parental wishes.  It was not well handled for a boy whose brother is maintained on a feeding tube.  At no point have I been given the option as a parent to be involved in HOW these topics are introduced and taught. 

For me, some of these topics are MORE controversial than a healthy, factual, well represented curriculum addressing sexuality, sexual identity and sexual health.

If the school has the right to teach these subjects, and I believe they do, they have the right to teach healthy sexual ed.

Why is it that our society is more comfortable with young children being exposed to images of war and violence (think history curriculum) but we balk in such a big way when healthy sexual education is introduced.  What this might say about who we are is rather concerning don't you think?

....and I can't believed the gov't caved.... <sigh>

special mom, I totally agree with the important points you are making - and I am really disappointed to read that this curriculum plan is going to be postponed and re-worked. I think that sexual health education in the school system is very important and necessary, including use of the scientific names of all body parts, info about how bodies change during puberty and safe sexual practices and so on. In my experience (as an elementary teacher and then school counsellor who taught sexual heath ed occasionally) information is provided at appropriate ages and stages. For example, teaching girls about their changing bodies and menstruation in grade 7 is too late (and even grade 6 is too late for some). Not all parents have open discussions with their children. Having all students in a class/grade learn about their bodies in class normalizes sexual health - it takes away or at least lessens the potential for topics to be scary or shameful or secretive. Lack of information and mis-information can lead to many unfortunate and unnecessary events (abuse, youth pregnancy, lack of safe sex practices and so on).

Generally, I think consultation is good thing, however leave the curriculum plans and decisions up to the educators who are trained and experienced in children/youth development and pedagogy  - whether that be in math, music, social studies or sexual health education. Also, for most new curriculum initiatives teachers have training/workshop sessions - I realize that would be vary among provinces and school boards - but I would assume and hope that Ontario would provide professional development for teachers for such a curriculum.

Also, the reaction by some that teachers are going to "teach children how to masturbate"  or another common response wrt sex ed programs "you are going to teach my child to be a homosexual" (because sexual identity is being addressed) are common fear and lack of understanding reactions. I wish the Ontario government had had a different response today to those vocal, fearful, misinformed protestors to what seems like a well thought out developmentally appropriate program.

No Beshpin.  I am suggesting that is what you are saying.

The Ontario schools have a responsibility to teach a range of subjects that are considered sensitive to some.  Sexual health is one of those subjects (along with war, genocide etc.).  Research has repeatedly demonstrated that sexual health programs reduce abuse, std's, teen pregnancy and so on.  Reserach demonstrates that a well rounded sexual health program is more effective than abstinence only education in reducing teen pregnancy. Ontario schools have a responsibility to teach issues promoting tolerance...that would include tolerance of other faiths AND sexual identity and orientation.  Ontario is province where same-sex marriage is recognized and therefore our students need to be introduced to the concept of same sex relationships.

There are very solid reasons for the inclusion of this education in schools.  If parents wish their children not to be exposed to such topics then they can address this issue with the school.  That applies to a broad range of subjects, sexual health is just one of them in my opinion.

Ultimately, you as a parent Beshpin have a range of opportunities to choose different options for your child's sexual education. 

ok - devil's advocate here....  so some families have chosen not to educate their grade 3's on certain things yet - (not necessarily ever)...  at what point is it considered parent's responsibility or health & welfare of children?

This is similar in some ways to licensing parents to have children - who makes the rules?  where do lines get drawn?  what does 'common sense' mean, or 'protective'.  What about the people who don't let their kids play outside without supervision - ever?  or the ones who ignore them by propping a bottle up and surfing the net?  I know people who are wonderful parents but cook the crappiest food and never clean the house.  So, which is it - loving, or clean & healthy?

  I can see that some people who have had varied experiences might worry.

My 9 year old daughter knows all the anatomical names of the body (much to the chagrin of my wife). We can often be heard driving to church on Sundays chanting, "PENIS, PENIS, PENIS". And then there is the spelling test.

"OK fireprincess, what does v-a-g-i-n-a spell."

"VAGINA!!!!!"

"OK, next word. b-o-o-b-s.

It's fun because it really bugs my wife  but I also I feel it is important to teach our daughter about such things. These are things not to be ashamed of.

As a conservative Christian, I have no issues with a revamp on the sex ed curriculum. As a teacher,I can honestly say that it's all about the delivery. There are a variety of ways to approach the topics without making light of them and making sure everybody is comfortable. However, sex ed in my classroom would be a riot. But, seeing as the sex ed issue is on the shelf, I should probably cancel my Playboy subscription.

beshpin... i'd suggest that it should be the parents teaching the kids about sex ed as well.  however, knowing what i know about the kids in the schools my children attend, that simply isn't going to be true accross the board.

now, as we've said earlier, your childs risk of being vicimized by a pedophile drop significantly if they can comfortably discuss sexuality, and know the anatomical terms 'penis' and 'vagina'. 

i'd suggest that well within childrens best interest to teach them this stuff.  because i can guarantee that probably for half of them, its going to be the only sexuality education they are going to get.

If parents had historically been any better than completely abysmmal about teaching sexual health, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Of course there are going to be parents who object to having sex ed taught in public schools, just as there are parents who object that biology is taught, or that the earth is spherical and revolves around the sun, or that there was a holocaust.

If we caved to every person that insisted this or that "contraversial" thing shouldn't be taught in schools, nothing would ever be taught.

Witch

Tons of times we know about tons stuff before anyone adult tells us. The thing is - do we have accurate information or inaccurate info? Years ago when it was "kissing gets you pregnant" it was not quite so dangerous. Today, "you can't get pregnant the first time" is not only wrong and you might end up pregnant, but you could also end up with HIV or clamydia or a drug resistant sexually transmitted disease. In Canada, the fastest HIV demographic is young, heterosexual women (25% of new cases).

I can tell folks that kids are far more knowledgeable of "stuff" than anyone gives them credit for. My ex's daughter was three and a half.  I came to the house a couple times and we did what she and her other friends did, movies, dinner, going to the nightclub, etc....  like any of her friends . She said one day "mommy, you love __, don't you?". My ex said, "___ is my friend" and her daughter said "but you love ___" and mom struggling with a new situation or with the discussion period said "___ is a special friend" and her daughter started to cry and asked "I want you to marry ___ because you love ___"

With my wife, our four year old neighbour of a few weeks said one day, without seeing any display of affection, "___ & ___ kiss". Her mom said " how do you know?". She said "I just know."

Our godchild used the pronouns he and she interchangeably for me from the time she could talk. We let the talk up to her mom. She put it off waiting until she was old enough to understand. Gender was almost like something you put on and took off like clothing. It was not fixed and was fluid. It was kinda funny. She would say with much indignation, when a waitperson said ma'am, "you know she is a he". One day, mom decided to let her in on it. She response was "mom, I know he is not a real boy, but he is not a real girl either and he is more boy than she is girl so leave him alone".

I have yet to meet a kid who did not figure it out, often before their parents did.

My granddaughter wasn't more than nine or ten when she told me one day that a person didn't have to have a baby just because she got pregnant.  I think she had just found out about abortion (although not the name) and she wanted to share that knowledge with me - perhaps thinking I didn't know.  She didn't learn this at school.  Most likely either her older half-sister or the older girls next door had told her, or she overheard them talking. 

Her parents' friends' daughter had a baby at 15. 

Kids get exposed to sex-ed whether it is in school or out of it.  Wouldn't you want your kid to have information rather than mis-information and half-baked ideas. 

It seems that every time there's a discussion about sex ed, there is an unbalanced focus on the physical. Sexuality is so heavily tied in with emotions that I think sex ed programs also need to focus on healthy relationships and negotiating consent.

And maybe this new initiative is incorporating these issues into the curriculum and they have simply not been getting the same media attention as the physical.

There is such a strong link. For example, if a variety of sexual identities and expressions are discussed in a positive way, students will be less likely to feel ashamed about their sexual orientation and, in turn, be less likely to end up in abusive relationships. Or those students who know all the proper words to talk about sexual anatomies and acts will be better prepared to talk with their partners about what they are and aren't comfortable with.

I definitely believe that students who have access to information are less likely to engage in risky behaviour and more confident to communicate about boundaries.

I also agree with the comment that teachers should be trained and should be able to present the subject with confidence.

For the rest of us who work with teens or who have teenage children, maybe we can start by having conversations about healthy communication in ALL situations.

I asked my 11 year old son about the topics that he might be discussing in sex ed and he said that I had already explained it and it didn't phase him at all. BUT I think it vitally important that everyone has this opportunity to learn. McGuinty has disappointed me again!...cms

I agree with the intention of presenting honest information to children about their bodies although I don't think most kids are going to understand oral sex, anal sex, etc. Prepubescent children don't know what orgasms are and this kind of information is going to confuse them.  I think it's a good idea to stick to the naming of body parts, explanations about the mechanics of the reproductive system, and teaching them early about the changes to their bodies.  For the older kids, present info on STDs, psychology of sexual behaviour, ethics and consequences, etc.

I think some people think that govenment agents want to go into your children's classroom and talk about blowjobs.  I can see why they would get anxious about that.

I remember a friend and I chatting about computer games & movies....he was challenging me on a choice that I had made.  He had a valid point. 

Our youth are introduced to violence in many forms from a young age...games, remembrance day service & images,  videos/movies re war,  the news....yet...a spot of skin...or sexuality and there are concerns.  Silly.....

Nonsense.  The real issue this got canned is because part of the program was to openly discuss sexual orientation, and we can't have that, can we. 

I'm just getting so goddamned tired about the right wing insanity.

There seems to be some confusion about what would have been taught when, so here it is:

Grade One (6 yrs) - names of body parts

Grade Three (8 yrs) - existence of same-sex families, and sexual orientation

Grade Five (10 yrs) - internal body reproductive parts, and body changes during puberty (already too late for many girls)

Grade Six (11 yrs) - what is masturbation (not a guide on how to do it, they already know that)

Grade Seven (12 years) - how to avoid pregnancy and STIs

My 6 year old already has a Grade Five level comprehension, based on this plan, purely as a result of her own questioning.  This is certainly NOT beyond what the child can comprehend, and it certainly IS stuff they need to know.  Responsible parents may choose to cover this stuff earlier, and so be it.  Parents who are so in favour of ignorance that they would keep this basic knowledge from their children can always try homeschooling.  Then they can show the Flinstones as a documentary while they are at it.

I'm dissapointed in their lack of implimentation as well. I know there were a lot of kids in my grade who only got sex educatoin from what we learned in school. I didn't start having sex ed classes until grade six and as people have mentioned above it is too late for many girls, including me. I feel sorry for any girl who starts their period not having a clue what's happening because they're parents don't teach them and our government doesn't think it worth while to teach yet.

I would be happier if there was less focus on STIs and AIDS though to be honest. Frome what I remember of Health education  was a lot of info on STIs and AIDS and the negative things that can come from having sex and a lot of statistics on pregnancy. I honstely felt like they were tyring to turn you off of sex for your entire life, felt like the main goal was really to scare kids off of it. There was very little talk of emotions or any positive aspects of a sexual relationship what so ever. I do understand that info on STIs etc is very important and needed but I think more integration with other forms of sex ed is impoartant.

 We taught our kids the correct name and function of body parts as soon as they were old enough to talk and ask questions.  Over time, we were able to discuss the consequences of sex outside a marriage relationship including self esteem and pregnancy.  When I was a member of a church sponsored boy's group at age 12, sex education was part of the curriculum.  Some parents were ready to rip the leader a whole new opening.  I guess they thought it'd be better if we learned it by doing it with the neighbour girls.  If people think knowledge is a problem, try ignorance.  STD's, unwanted pregnancies, etc. aren't exactly things that will enrich their lives.

I'm going to sound a bit controversial here. Be warned - old bugger's rant following.

There is knowledge and knowledge.

When I was a child of eight my mother told me about periods - simply because her mother hadn't told her anything and it was a terrible surprise to her.

At eight, I found the whole thing frightening. What? Blood was going to come out of me? Every month???

I remember telling Mum I didn't believe her. We lived in the bush - so how come sheep didn't wear these pad thingies, if what she said was true???

In those days we weren't told about sex until High School. I recall a matronly woman, wearing a hat and gloves, discussing her version of sex.

She pointed to a diagram on the blackboard, and said, "What are these called, girls?"

Dutifully we repeated, "Re - productive- organs".

(Well, that was a great help! This woman looked like she'd be more comfortable being on the flower roster at church than having sex.)

But, and this is my point, we were given enough freedom and trust by parents, to explore these  issues ourselves.

Our peers worked out an elaborate system for what was permissable. Basically, except for what was known as "down there", we could just explore our own sexuality.

Dads were something to be reckoned with - believe me, if your Dad looked you in the eye and said, "Remember, your mother and I trust you" - you monitored your own behaviour.

This is the controversial bit. These days kids know all about penises, vaginas, masturbation, same gender sex, - but their parents are hovering helicopters.

They aren't trusted to go to parks on their own,  or indeed anywhere much without an adult present. Most children are sexually interfered with by relatives or known adults - yet thay are constantly warned of "stranger danger".

How on earth are these kids ever going to assume responsibility for themselves, if they aren't given age appropriate responsibility?

No wonder so many of them find it difficult to leave home.

Sex education isn't just about knowing about penises, vaginas, etc. It's also about parents giving their children appropriate responsibility and trust.

 I am surprised the government changed it's mind so quickly.  they didn't have a very good plan for introducing it to the public in my opinion.

Parents panic when they listen to the radio or hear the news sound bites.

they could have easily sent each parent of a school age child a newspaper with the info.  They could have had tons of meetings to discuss issues and concerns.....  I too had heard someone say they were going to teach "how to"  which of course is silly.

SOmeone up thread talked about how they were sick and tired of the right wings ......... 

I don't think this is a right wing issue.  I think this is a parental comfort issue.  Many parents are uncomfortable with how a teacher is going to handle this.....  

And lets not forget that the province has millions of right wing people who have the right to also be represented by their MPP's.

That's controversial?? It is right on the mark!

I think it would have been controversial, Pilgrim, if you'd suggested that they just be allowed to experiment in place of formal education.

 I don't know why parents are furious about not being consulted, from what I heard about they were consulted.

Sex ed is something that shouldn't have to be taught in schools, but unfortunately it has to be.  I don't know the details of what the current program is like, but if it's similar to what I was taught it needs to be overhauled.  There was information that was taught that was wrong.  Luckily, my mom had given me the correct information ahead of time.  In later years we were taught some things that I thought were completely inappropriate.

As for who teaches it, do you guys have phys ed teachers in elementary school?  We had 1 teacher (or in split grade classes 4 teachers) who taught the majority of the courses, and only had specialized teachers for music and french.  For the younger grades, I don't agree with bringing in someone to teach basic anatomy.  It doesn't need to be taught as a 'sex ed' course and can easily be combined with other information.  I would hope that teachers aren't uncomfortable at that stage.

It may be because I dont have children, but I dont quite understand why people are uncomfortable with a teacher or someone qualified in teaching sex-ed speaking to their children about these issues - which I believe we ALL agree are very important. It can't be that the parents don't trust the teacher around their children, or else they'd be reported and hopefully no longer have a teaching job. The only other 'negative' is that it takes a miniscule amount of power over the issue away from the parents. (Parents still have the ultimate influence over their children, however) So what? As long as the kids are informed and know how to protect themselves from predators, diseases, and unwanted pregnancy, it shouldn't matter who they learn it from. 

the only other problem is finding teachers who wouldn't be embarrassed or uncomfortable teaching sex-ed to their pupils, like some of you have brought up. But there are just as many parents who arent qualified, or are uncomfortable talking to their children about sex. My parents definitely found it uncomfortable - fortunately it wasn't too harmful because they only had boys and I believe boys figure things out by themselves early on for the most part

Just out of curiosity, are there any stats on how many parents talk to their children about issues in sexual health etc...... versus those who do not. I hear a lot of  "Schools wouldn't need to have sex ed classes if parents did a better job about talking to their children about such things." But, is there any empirical evidence to back up those claims?

But, is there any empirical evidence to back up those claims?

 .

Duh, so bloody what? Just because there is a high STD and teen pregnancy rate (which I have read is in decline anyway) does not mean that parents are not talking to their kids or bringing some other factor to the discussion. It means kids will do what kids want to do. You bring two statements to this discussion that make absolutely no sense and assume way too much.

In other words....horseshit.

LOL sounds like someone has a mysterious itch somewhere ............. they got ointments for that you know

What the hell does that even mean? Do you ever think before opening that mouth of yours or do the words just spring forth like a shit fountain?

What the hell does that even mean? Do you ever think before opening that mouth of yours or do the words just spring forth like a shit fountain?

 save that talk for your friends or what passes for them .. you always manage to impress me by sounding like the runt of the litter ......

In other words you're taking it rather personally................... like you had some bad run in with VD or almost got someone knocked up in life.................. rather than come up with an arguement as to why teen pregancy or std rates are so prevalent in an age of great sex ed from parents ....

I believe there were some studies done which took random parents of various school age chiuldren and asked them to fill out surveys designed to test knowledge of sexual health at the level the school would be teaching. The children were also asked to answer the same survey.

The findings indicated that most parents were not terribly well informed about the subject either, and this was reflected in the children's responses as well. The parents who insisted that sex education belonged at home tended to have lower scores overall, and so did their children. In cases where the parents actually did make an attempt to actually teach sexual health at home, the children tended to get the same answers wrong as did the parent.

I'm afraid I don't have the reference to those studies. I apologise.

However, the Guttmacher institute released a report a couple of years ago that showed teenage pregnancy rates in the US increased 3% 2003 and 2006, the first increase in a trend that had been in rapid decline since the advent of comprehensive sex education programs in schools. The increase appears to correlate, according to the study, to the institution of "abstinence only" education programs which replaced comprehensive sex education in many states. Abstinence programs advocate for sex education at home, and not in schools, along with the ridiculous abstinence approach to teenage sex.

Try not to pay Jes any mind CF. She's just here to make people mad at her. She seems to like it for some reason.

No more than your attention seeking attempts to sound deep and mysterious .... whearas in real life you get ignored a lot

Jes and CF and any others who want to sling crap.

For the record I expect more respectful behaviour from my son in grade three.

For the record, specialmom, I asked a simple question in which jes responded with her usual crap, then made it personal. I give as I get. Perhaps if jes would merely think before responding, instead of trolling............

I, rather bluntly, merely asked her if she thinks before opening her mouth. Technically, jes was the only person slinging crap in this exchange.

The second.