Protecting Our Children

Protecting Our Children

Jan 29, 2020

The “system” used to have protection of young children at its core. Yet we are now seeing a proliferation of agendas which have replaced the question of what is best for a child with the desire to use them for social experiments. The rise of the militant LGBT lobby which now seeks to sexualise children for its own ideological goals is a perverse failure of the state to protect our children and to put their best interests at hearts. The scale of the grooming gang scandal is another example of the protection of children being jettisoned by local authorities and police because of a fear of being called racist.


A new law about relationships and sex education (RSE) comes into effect for all schools in England this September. Children from the age of four will be taught what schools think children should learn about sex, sexuality and gender dysphoria. Unfortunately, this law has created an environment where children can be misled, confused and in some cases prematurely sexualised.

Serious issues have already arisen where schools have been teaching RSE early. For example, one parent was told by a teacher in a Birmingham school that it was none of her business what the school taught her child.

Schools have been known to act unlawfully and push a problematic ideological agenda. The Educate and Celebrate programme used to teach RSE is not neutral but aims to “smash heteronormativity” and the No Outsiders programme that has attracted so much media attention is based on “Queering the primary classroom”.

Some Head Teachers have refused to listen to parents’ concerns. In Heavers Farm Primary in Croydon children were expected to participate in LGBT Pride celebrations against parents’ wishes.

Even Local Authorities have caused problems. Warwickshire County Council has recommended schools use the All About Me programme which encourages masturbation for Infants children.

So, what are the issues with RSE? Alarmingly, established, mainstream child development expertise has been ignored in many RSE programmes. This means that they cannot be guaranteed to be age appropriate. Some programmes aim to lower a child’s inhibitions and encourage sexual experimentation. This is effectively grooming.

Images cannot be unseen. They are imprinted on the memory for life. There have been instances of primary children shielding their eyes from viewing the sex education video presented to them. With a video about a transitioning 11-year-old child, the children were so distressed it had to be turned off before it was finished.

In some Relationships education programmes, friendships with someone of the same sex (the most common friendship among children of primary school age), is blended with same-sex adult sexual relationships. This is misleading, confusing and unhelpful. It is not education.

Teachers promoting gender choice are irresponsible and arguably criminally misleading children. Life-changing surgery and a lifetime of drugs is not good health. For example, there is evidence to show puberty blockers retard and even stop physical development in areas like skeletal structure and the brain in children and teenagers. And many individuals have already deeply regretted their decision to transition.

The law says that parents are the primary educators for their children. There is, however, no right to withdraw from Relationships education up to 16 years, and there is only a downgraded right to request withdrawal from sex education in secondary school. This is an unprecedented step to usurp the authority of parents by the nanny state.

Every school will choose how they will fulfil the requirements RSE law, some using in-house resources and others using or adapting external programmes. Therefore, the only way a parent can know what their child will be taught is to ask.

While schools are required by law to consult with parents about RSE, the final decision lies with the Head Teacher. Some schools just use the consultation to inform parents of what they have decided to teach, and others don’t consult at all.

In addition, some Relationships and Sex education potentially contravenes the Human Rights Act (1998), which states that parents have a right effectively to receive education for their children that is in line with their own philosophical and religious convictions.

It is a serious matter to contravene the Human Rights Act.

The law says that RSE must “have regard” to the religious background of the pupils. Religions often have strong boundaries around sex and sexuality. The majority of people in the UK have a religion and many of them would disagree with the content of some lessons.

The Equalities Act is often used as a reason to push contentious content in RSE lessons, but religion is a protected characteristic under the same law and must be respected by schools. The Act was designed to prevent discrimination, not to force compliance in the classroom – or anywhere else.

Many parents do not want RSE for their primary school children. They need to be informed of their rights and encouraged to challenge schools where lesson content is not only inappropriate, but potentially damaging for their children. Grass roots action is what is needed to make this happen and to make the government think again.

Nanny does not know best.

Written by: Susan Mason