[Vivienne]

Thoroughly enjoyed the "Sunday Surgery" with Aled last night. As usual, Aled displayed complete sensitivity.

The annoying subject, however, of "Sex Education for 4 Year Olds" came up. I heard this on Newsbeat the other day, and I, for one, think it is just plain ridiculous. Despite all the arguments to the contrary, I think children should be allowed to have an innocent childhood, as far as is possible today.

Please let me know your thoughts on this.

** Also: it should be noted that when 'phoning R1, there is now a new number = 03700 100 100 **

[Munki Bhoy]

I heard someone claiming that they needed something to tell the kids when they ask where their little baby brother came from. I say anything other than "a special cuddle" is going to far.

[Vivienne]

A reply at last. My "theory" is biologically humans aren't able to have children until later than this age, thus why spoil the innocence so early on. Totally unnecessary, I think.

[Console]

As I alluded to on Aled.info, I don't actually know what that 'innocence' relates to. Why would knowing about sex (or guns, war, death etc) make them any less 'innocent' than they already are?

[Vivienne]

Innocence = just the ability to grow up free from sexual stuff (at least for a while)... surely telling kids so young is only gonna encourage kids to find out more, rather than puting them off.

[Munki Bhoy]

I'd say that's a fairly sensible benchmark to use. When it becomes necessary for them to know, that is the time to tell them. Until then, make it up. At this rate, Santa will get phased out as breaking the truth to them at a later age becomes too traumatic and breaches their human rights.

[Console]

Innocence = just the ability to grow up free from sexual stuff (at least for a while).

Well, under that very odd and specific definition, I suppose that telling them about sex would make them less 'innocent'.

surely telling kids so young is only gonna encourage kids to find out more

Well, that's where the parents and teachers come in, to help them find out more, to explain to them everything so they don't have to find out all by themselves. They can learn pretty much all they need to know in safety.

[Vivienne]

Safety? Why not leave this at least a few years longer? I didn't find out about sex until I was around 11 (from friends), and I didn't wind up a "teenage pregnancy statistic".

[timp]

They can learn pretty much all they need to know in safety.

But they don't don't 'need to know it' at the age of 4 I think is Viv's point.

[Vivienne]

That's exactly my point.

[catherine]

I actually think it is a good thing, isn't there a country in europe that are very open about sex with the children and even talk about it around the dinner table and have the lowest teenage pregnancy rates and std rates?

[Console]

Why not leave this at least a few years longer?

Why leave it a few years longer?

I didn't find out about sex until I was around 11 (from friends)

I think it's the 'from friends' aspect that they may to be trying to avoid. Learning from friends, especially ones that don't have all of the information themselves, is what may make children to try and discover the information on their own, especially if they feel embarrassed about talking to their parents and teachers about it. Having their elders teach them about sex in an environment where they can ask questions and have them answered in a way in which they'll understand will (hopefully) curb any attempt for the child to find out for themselves. While you may think they may not 'need' to know about it until later on, they may begin to know about it from quite young - too little information can sometimes be far more dangerous than all of the information.

[timp]

I agree making sex the taboo it is in this country in some situations doesn't help our teenage pregnancy rates, but the age of 4 I think is over the top. I was perfectly happy not knowing about it till 11, and I don't feel any the less informed/educated about it.

[Console]

I agree making sex the taboo it is in this country is some situations doesn't help our teenage pregnancy rates, but the age of 4 I think is over the top.

Would you think that four is too young if sex wasn't a taboo subject though? If it was something that was discussed as casually as the weather then when you have any problems with four year olds (or younger) learning about it?

I was perfectly happy not knowing about it till 11, and I don't feel any the less informed/educated about it.

I'm sure you were, and most people are, but there are some that could probably benefit from a proper sexual education at a younger age.

[timp]

Would you think that four is too young if sex wasn't a taboo subject though? If it was something that was discussed as casually as the weather then when you have any problems with four year olds (or younger) learning about it?

One of the problems is a lack of understanding for the 4 year old (or younger). These are adult emotions they will not feel for 7+ years. I do agree with not making sex a taboo subject. Even my parents get embarrassed when the topic of a wet dream comes up etc. But I think the minimum age should not be 4 and more like 10/11, when these emotions are beginning to be felt and the innocent 'special cuddle' explanation is becoming redundant.

[Console]

I would agree with emotional problems being a problem if we were discussing children actually having sex, and you would be right, there are emotions involved that children that young may not be able to deal with well, but all we're talking about is giving them information about sex - I can't see why there'd be any emotional problems involved.

[timp]

4 is an age where girls and boys hate each other isn't it? Won't the ideas involved in sex confuse them? I suppose a teacher would be the best person to judge this though.

Perhaps there is also the idea that parents don't want their children growing up too quickly and them knowing about sex could symbolise this 'growing up' for the parent. I remember when I was in year 2 and I told my mate that santa didn't exist and his mum was on the phone to my mum that very evening with rage, because I was spoiling his innocence, and hence growing up too quickly for her liking.

[Console]

Perhaps there is also the idea that parents don't want their children growing up too quickly and them knowing about sex could symbolise this 'growing up' for the parent.

Children grow-up at the rate they grow-up, telling them about sex won't change this. Why wouldn't a parent want their child to have the best possible start in life? Surely growing up knowing about basic things, like sex, would be a great aid to that goal.

[catherine]

Sex isn't about being in love and waiting until you are married anymore, sex is something most girls have done by the time they are 14 and most boys have done by the time they are 15. This is what needs to be changed and if talking to your child about it from an early age stops them from being so curious that they just go and do it then that is what should be done.

[timp]

I suppose it is subjective as to what the best start in life is. Maybe then the parents should decide if they want their kids to take part in these lessons, and the teacher should split the class accordingly. I'm afraid I would have to say no at 4 years old though...

[catherine]

What is wrong with talking about sex? What is so dirty about it that you don't want your child to know?

[timp]

There is nothing wrong or dirty about it, and I have no problems with it being taught. Just not at 4.

[Yudster]

I think I wouldn't talk specifically to my four year old about sex in the same way that I wouldn't talk to him about tax, or global warming, or any other things that he doesn't need to know and wouldn't be able to understand. However I also wouldn't hide these things from him. In this way I hope - and believe - that he will grow up asking questions as and when they occur to him - which, if he is in an open and caring environment, will be at the appropriate time for him to learn about them. As far as I remember, I "grew up knowing", I didn't have to be taught about sex, and my older kids say exactly the same thing. I think it works.

I don't object to sex education in schools as long as it is balanced and objective - my feeling at the moment is that the way it is done encourages children to feel that they somehow ought to be doing it, there is an assumption that they are - and going by my kids and their friends, this is a long way from reality. I know several kids who have been distressed because they aren't having sex, and actually don't want to, but they are getting the message from all sides that they should be. Don't forget, if you ask a bunch of 14 year olds if they have had sex, most of them will say yes. I don't believe most of them will be telling the truth. Basing an educational policy on that kind of statistic is a dangerous game.

I would prefer more emphasis on the fact that there is no such thing as "safe sex" rather than what seems to me to often be not much more than a "how to" guide.

[Munki Bhoy]

We got sex education in Primary 6. That's about 10 years old, though in my case I was a year younger than everyone else so I was only 9. Looking back, I think I was too young to learn about it then and to be quite honest I didn't even care at that point. Maybe I'm unusual in that. Mind you, I'm definitely unusual in that at no point did I ask the "where do babies come from" question to my parents!

I got sex education again in high school by which point it made more sense and I actually gave a toss, if you'll pardon the pun.

[DevilsDuck]

I also had sex education when I was about 10.

All I can remember is laughing my ass off at the nudist family playing beach tennis and the animated penis that grew and smiled!