Report of Mini-Inquiry into Relationship and Sexuality Education

Theme of written sub	Respondents	Outline of Evidence
Curriculum Integration and Content	London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; Dundonald Gospel Hall; National Secular Society; Prof. M Brown; NICCY; Love for Life; WPG NI; Parentkind; Women’s Platform; ICNI; M Collins Foundation; Humanists UK; HerNI; Policywise; NIHRC; Parenting Focus; ECNI; CCEA; Mental Health Champion; Alliance for Choice; Methodist Church Ireland; Dr S King-Hill (QUB); CARE NI; Faith Voices; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; Presbyterian Church; Ind Autism Reviewer NI; Dr S Whitten; CSTS; Women’s Aid	Majority of respondents welcome age-appropriate comprehensive, scientific based teaching of RSE and are aware of its importance for all school- age children. Support the new legislation brought about to include preventative contraception & access to abortion in 2003. This is essential for protecting children and young people's health and wellbeing – including safeguarding them from abuse and exploitation. The NIHRC said teaching young people that contraception is wrong "contradicts risk-reduction approaches to youth sexual activity" The Majority of respondents recommended that RSE should not be taught according to religious principles as this will exempt some children from receiving information in relation to certain topics of RSE. Several organisations recommend a standardised approach across all schools (underlined type) but with need to be flexible to deal with emerging issues. One respondent recommended that RSE is standardised across all regions (Policywise). A small number of respondents who agree with the majority on teaching of RSE nonetheless believe it should continue to be taught according to the moral ethos of school. (in italics type) Prof Brown highlighted the need for RSE policy to be developed and delivered for those with Intellectual Disability. This was reinforced by the Autism Reviewer in respect of need to design a policy to suit autistic kids. Uster Teachers Union also highlighted need to address RSE with SEN kids.   Content Recommendations to be mandatory: Consent Online Safety Awareness LGBTQ+ relationships VAWG Healthy and unhealthy relationships – spotting red flags; how to seek support; Misogyny-understanding the pyramid of sexual violence; Navigating social media; and Image Based Sexual Abuse. Respect and dignity, Bodily autonomy, Child protection - inappropriate touching, Female genital mutilation   M Collins Foundation recommended need for specific curriculum focus on Artificial Intelligence (AI) within RSE so that children and young people can engage with it safely, recognising benefits, as well as risks associated.
Policy Implementation and School Compliance	Dundonald Gospel Hall; NSS; Prof M Brown; Parentkind; Women’s Platform; Marie Collins Foundation; Rainbow & HERe NI; Parenting Focus; CCEA; Mental Health Champion NI; Alliance for Choice; Methodist Church Ireland; Dr Sophie King-Hill; CARE NI; Faith Voices; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; Presbyterian Church; Autism Reviewer NI; Dr Suzanne Whitten; CTCS; Women’s Aid.	Majority of Respondents of opinion that Parents should be consulted and informed about RSE topics within school as better engagement reduces risk of parents removing child from certain aspects, however mandatory minimum curriculum should not be determined by parents.  One respondent (Women’s Platform) do not see need for Parents to be consulted as RSE falls fully within the Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order (Northern Ireland) 2007, so no requirement for any additional or specific information to be shared with parents.   A number of respondents emphasized need for Input from a range of academic and professionals in the field is imperative. M Collins Foundation stated that RSE mandatory minimum curriculum should not be determined by parents. Such content should be set according to experts within public health and safeguarding, having regard to information that CYP need to maximise their personal health, wellbeing, and interpersonal relationships.   Prof Brown stated that to effectively support in special school settings, agreement regarding core content that proactively includes the voices of children and young people with intellectual disability and their parents is necessary.   Several respondents advised a new approach to RSE is required. Autism Reviewer NI stated the approach needs to be more person-centred and trauma-informed. Dr Suzanne Whitten (QUB- Philosophy) research found that PwC methods and principles, have been proven to be effective in fostering positive affective relations, trust, and a democratic ethos among participants to an inquiry.
Teacher Training and External Providers	NSS; Prof M Brown; Love for Life; WPG NI; Women’s Platform; ICNI; M Collins Foundation; Rainbow & HERe NI; PolicyWise; NIHRC; ECNI; CCEA; Dr Sophie King-Hill; CARE NI; Methodist Church; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; Presbyterian Church; Autism Reviewer; CTCS; Women’s Aid	All respondents called for better training for teachers of RSE and external practitioners and for this to be incorporated into the teacher training programme. All stated the importance of teachers/trainers being confident in the knowledge and delivery. Teacher training programmes must address issues related to culture and different religious ideologies. CCEA also recognises that there is a need for comprehensive Teacher Professional Leaning to ensure that teachers have both the confidence, skills and the knowledge to deliver RSE effectively. External providers can have an important role to play in the delivery of effective RSE. They should not be used to replace the role of the teacher, but they can bring specific specialized knowledge and approaches to learning about a range of RSE matters, e.g. Women’s Aid.   The Majority of respondents advised against using faith-based organisations as external providers stating faith and public health do not mix and it is often at the detriment of the young people. The NSS referred to the Parents for Inclusive Education Northern Ireland (PfIE) report published in March noted that some religious bodies take stances on sensitive issues which can "hurt, exclude and other, creating harmful social dynamics and significant mental health risks".
Monitoring and Evaluation	Prof M Brown; ICNI; PolicyWise; NIHRC; ECNI; CCEA; Methodist Church; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; CTCS;	All respondents who gave evidence on this theme stated that monitoring of RSE should come under the ETI. There should be a consistent approach to monitoring and ensuring compliance with policy & provision.   The NIHRC recommends that the Department of Education collects data on the number of children and young people withdrawn from RSE lessons, including the reason for their withdrawal. Data should be disaggregated to determine whether any specific groups are disproportionately impacted by the provision for opt-outs   Prof Brown: RSE programmes need to incorporate clear outcome measures and include formal evaluation, an integral element of delivery to identify impact and whether the intended outcomes have been achieved. It is highlighted that programme evaluation and research should involve all key stakeholders including young people with ID and their parents.
Stakeholder Engagement and Inclusivity	London School; Dundonald Gospel Hall; NSS; Prof M Brown; Love for Life; Women’s Platform; ICNI; Humanists; Rainbow & HERe NI; NIHRC; CCEA; Mental Health Champion; Presbyterian Church; Methodist Church; Dr Sophie King-Hill; CARE NI; Ulster Teachers Union; CTCS	All respondents agree that consultation with children and parents is essential. Parents should be informed of the content and there should be proactive engagement.   Majority of respondents emphasized the need to involve healthcare and other professionals in the field when developing RSE policies. A number of respondents including the NIHRC agreed that Content should be evidence-based and designed by experts in the field. Prof Brown emphasized the need for experts with knowledge and experience of the relationship and sexuality needs and concerns of people with ID.   Majority agreed that Content should be fully inclusive of all young people. CCEA stated that Schools should also recognise the diversity of family life today, particularly the fact that some children may have gay, lesbian or bisexual parents or carers, some of whom may be in a civil partnership. All staff should be sensitive and respectful of difference, ensuring that no pupil ever feels or is excluded, or experiences bullying due to their family or home circumstances.
Legislative and Rights-Based Considerations	NIHRC; WPG NI; Women’s Platform; Marie Collins Foundation; Rainbow Project & HERe NI; CCEA; Dr Sophie King-Hill; CARE NI; NSS; Prof Brown; Faith Voices; CTCS	ALL respondents refer to the UNCRC - supports children and young people’s rights and this should underpin approaches and decisions surrounding RSE.   WPG NI & Women’s Platform Draw attention to the obligations of the UK to recognise reproductive rights as a specific human rights issue in international law. As a State Party to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the UK is required to take action to ensure all women and girls can enjoy their full human rights, which under the Convention includes access to full sexual and reproductive rights and services.   NIHRC state that RSE legislation, policy and guidance should reflect international human rights standards by expressly articulating the fundamental right of children and young people to an education and to exercise agency and autonomy in the exercise of that right.
Impact of Withdrawal Policies	NSS; Parentkind; Dundonald Gospel Hall M Brown; WPG NI & Women’s Platform; Marie Collins Foundation; Rainbow Project & HERe; ICNI; Humanists; Parenting Focus; NIHRC; ECNI; CCEA; Mental Health Champion; Alliance for Choice; Dr Sophie King-Hill; CARE NI; Faith Voices; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; Presbyterian Church; CTCS	Majority of respondents do not agree that parents should be able to withdraw their children from RSE topics and consider this to be safe-guarding risk. This is supported by NASUWT & Teachers Union. ICNI argue that they do not agree with Parents being able to withdraw child from RSE asnot all children and young people live within safe households, or are involved in healthy relationships   Faith based respondents argue that parents should have right to decide what their child is educated in support parental withdrawal. Care NI highlight that there isa fine line between balancing the rights of children and parents/carers and setting those rights against one another. ECHR and the UDHR include clauses which affirm the primacy of parents in education, and their right to access education for their child which aligns with their religious and philosophical convictions. Indeed, we at CARE NI strongly affirm the primacy of parents’ decision-making within education.
Violence against Women and Girls	WPG NI; Women’s Platform; Humanists UK; PolicyWise; NIHRC; CCEA; Mental Health Champion; Alliance for Choice; Methodist Church; CARE NI; NASUWT; Ulster Teachers Union; Presbyterian Church; CTCS; Women’s Aid	All respondents of opinion that adequate RSE is essential to tackling VAWG in our society. Women’s Platform state the EU Directive on combating violence against women and girls does not specify a curriculum, although it emphasises the importance of access to information. The NIHRC recommends that the RSE curriculum includes violence against women and girls as a mandatory component and that it reflects international standards.   Majority of respondents recommended the need to include CONSENT education within RSE as this will help address the stigma surrounding victims of violence.  Sir John Gillen said: "I'm a firm believer that children as young as five and six should be introduced, at a child friendly level, to the concepts of consent, to the concepts of responsibility in relations with the opposite or same sex, as the case may be."

 

Committee Consideration

Part 1: To compare the approaches to and outcomes of Relationship and Sexuality Education (RSE) in these islands and Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) internationally

79. The Committee invited a range of academic stakeholders specialist in different aspects of the terms of reference, most of whom contributed at least to writing and with submissions of their relevant work and many of whom presented live to the Committee to have the opportunity to take questions.

 

CRE - Comprehensive Relationship Education/CSE – Comprehensive Sexuality Education

80. CRE is another name for teaching young people about relationships and their role in society, framing the development of the young person and the requirements of healthy social engagement more holistically. Internationally, it is recognised as implicating the whole person and for that reason, contributions regarding RSE and mental health and RSE and bullying are reflected in this section.

81. This overarching perspective goes beyond the mechanics of delaying first sexual experiences, preventing pregnancy and disease and giving young people the skills to manage their relationships healthily and safely; by also giving a positive perspective. This was expressed by one NI academic, Dirk Schubotz, who moved here and made it his career’s work to address a topic he found no one else would. “RSE is not an ordinary subject, because it goes to the core of who we are as human beings and of our relationships, our emotions and how we feel. We are human beings and social beings only because of the relationships that we have. From that point of view, I strongly advocate that RSE should probably be the most important subject that we teach in school because it is core to who we are”.

82. In its International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) states that:

83. “Sexuality Education is defined as an age-appropriate, culturally relevant approach to teaching about sex and relationships by providing scientifically accurate, realistic, non-judgemental information. Sexuality Education provides opportunities to explore one’s own values and attitudes and to build decision-making, communication and risk-reduction skills about many aspects of sexuality”.

84. Professor Maria Lohan also quoted from this guidance in presenting international understandings of CSE:

85. “Comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) is a curriculum-based process of teaching and learning about the cognitive, emotional, physical and social aspects of sexuality. It aims to equip children and young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that will empower them to: realize their health, well-being and dignity; develop respectful social and sexual relationships; consider how their choices affect their own well-being and that of others; and, understand and ensure the protection of their rights throughout their lives”.

86. The guidance notes that comprehensive sexuality education goes beyond reproduction, risks and disease and should include “ongoing discussions about social and cultural factors relating to broader aspects of relationships and vulnerability, such as gender and power inequalities, socio-economic factors, race, HIV status, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity”.

87. It finds that education programmes will be less effective if they omit key issues. For example, it states that “failure to discuss menstruation can contribute to the persistence of negative social and cultural attitudes towards it”.

88. Other issues that should not be omitted include “the [sexual and reproductive health] needs of young people living with disabilities or HIV; unsafe abortion and harmful practices such as [child, early and forced marriage] and [female genital mutilation/cutting] or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity”. It argues that “[s]ilencing or omitting these topics can contribute to stigma, shame and ignorance, may increase risk-taking and create help-seeking barriers for vulnerable or marginalised populations”.

89. In fact, discussions by members of the Committee with newcomer and migrant groups in the Committee’s stakeholder meetings made this point keenly. Parent representatives and young people from these groups wanted school to give a steer with age-appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically sound information on relationship and sexuality education.

Legislative and Rights-Based Considerations

90. The introduction of relevant subordinate legislation is chronicled above at the point at which the Committee was engaged to consider it. However, these developments were preceded by prolonged and significant work by actors concerned at the picture captured of inadequate RSE via the UN reporting bodies. This picture is framed by the local and international human rights context and illuminated not only by relevant caselaw of the European Court of Human Rights but by decisions of the UK courts.

91. The mini-inquiry was book-ended by two pieces of work by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC).

92. The Commission published its ‘Relationships and Sexuality Education in Post-Primary Schools in Northern Ireland: A Compelling Case for Reform’ in June 2023, assessing the extent to which post-primary schools in Northern Ireland are providing “age-appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically accurate education on sexual and reproductive health and rights, covering prevention of early pregnancy and access to abortion”. This assessment chimed with the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 2018 Report cited above.

93. The investigation found that “there are some positive examples of post-primary schools providing comprehensive and scientifically accurate Relationships and Sexuality Education. However, in the majority of schools this is not the case, where resources are not always considered to be comprehensive, pluralistic and objective. There were also some examples of schools using resources which were outdated”.

94. The NIHRC notes that within the international human rights framework, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in interpreting the Convention, are of most direct application here, as they are given direct effect by the Human Rights Act.

95. On RSE, the Commission cites A.R. and L.R. v. Switzerland, Application No 22338/15, judgement of 18 January 2018, saying “In its jurisprudence, the ECtHR has identified that RSE pursues a number of legitimate aims including the preservation of health, the prevention of sexual violence and exploitation. In addition, RSE prepares children for social realities”.

NIHRC 2023 ‘Relationships and Sexuality Education in Post-Primary Schools in Northern Ireland: A Compelling Case for Reform’ Report Recommendations	NIHRC 2025 Progress report Recommendations Implementation status:
1. The NIHRC recommends that the Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order (NI) 2007 is amended to reflect the CEDAW Committee recommendation 86(d) to “make age- appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically accurate education on sexual and reproductive health and rights a compulsory component of curriculum for adolescents, covering prevention of early pregnancy and access to abortion, and monitor its implementation.”	Effective implementation [Green]
2. The NIHRC recommends that the NI Office, with the support of the Department of Education NI, develop options for reform of the Minimum Content Order. Draft amendments should be developed to achieve the aim of ensuring that all elements of comprehensive RSE are delivered within every school in NI. The amendments should be sufficiently prescriptive to guarantee a standard level of RSE throughout all schools in NI.	Some steps that are assisting with implementation [Amber]
3. The NIHRC recommends that the NI Office and Department of Education NI develop an implementation plan to accompany the proposed reforms to the Minimum Content Order. This should include the development of a Circular to schools providing guidance on the key elements of ‘comprehensive’ RSE. This should be developed following engagement with relevant stakeholders and experts to ensure that RSE programmes are inclusive and meet the educational needs of young people with diverse gender and sexual identities, ethnic minority students and disabled students.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
4. The Department of Education NI should support schools to amend their policies and procedures relating to RSE to ensure they fully consider any reforms to the Minimum Content Order.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
5. In line with the pre-existing arrangements for monitoring the delivery of the curriculum it is recommended that the ETI amend their oversight arrangements to ensure that schools are appropriately delivering the new elements of the Minimum Content Order. The ETI should develop new arrangements for engaging with children and young people during their assessment of RSE provision.	Effective implementation [Green]
6. The NIHRC recommends that the implementation of the required amendments to the Minimum Content Order should be informed by the views and educational needs of young people. Care should be taken to ensure that engagement and consultation considers the needs of students with diverse gender and sexual identities, ethnic minority students and disabled students.	Some steps that are assisting with implementation [Amber]
7. The Department of Education NI should support schools to include students in co-developing and evaluating RSE policies.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
8. The NIHRC recommends the Department of Education engage with teachers to invite their views on the supports they require to enable them to competently deliver RSE to post primary school children.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
9. The NIHRC recommends that the Department of Education engage with teacher training colleges in Northern Ireland (Stranmillis University College, St Mary’s University College, Queen’s University Belfast and Ulster University) to ensure their programmes adequately educate newly qualified teacher in the provision of RSE. The Department of Education NI should also consider arrangements for the continuing professional development of members of the teaching profession, to ensure they are trained in the delivery of comprehensive, scientifically accurate RSE.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
10. The NIHRC recommends that the Department of Education NI develop additional guidance for schools on how to establish effective partnerships with external RSE providers. This should include guidance on ensuring that programmes and resource are compliant with international human rights standards.	Some steps that are assisting with implementation [Amber]
11. The CCEA should review resources provided under the RSE hub to ensure they meet the requirements set out in CEDAW Committee recommendation 86(d).	Effective implementation [Green]
12. The NIHRC recommends that the RSE Curriculum is regularly evaluated and revised by the Department of Education NI, in order to ensure that it is accurate, human rights compliant, and adapting to emerging needs. Regular updates should be provided to the NI Assembly Committee for Education.	Limited steps that have had little impact in terms of implementation [Red]
13. The NIHRC recommends that the Secretary of State for NI put in place ongoing arrangements to monitor the effectiveness of any measures taken to bring about implementation of the UN CEDAW Committee recommendation 86(d) in NI.	Some steps that are assisting with implementation [Amber]

96. The NIHRC responded to the Department’s consultation on regulations and also contributed to the Committee’s mini-inquiry.

97. The Committee commends the work of the Commission.

98. There is no consensus across the Committee on the right of parental withdrawal, but the Committee expects that schools will engage, inform and consult parents so as to minimise withdrawal of pupils from RSE.

99. Several members of the Committee support the report and recommendations of the Commission and urge partners in Government to continue to work to effect implementation of its recommendations.  Some members noted that the Commission did not report on ethos; these members would want RSE always to be delivered together with ethos and worldview and from a risk/harm perspective rather than the that of the health and autonomy of “rights-bearers”.

100. The Commission advised that while parental rights are a consideration, a child’s rights to education for protection and health trumped a parent’s right to respect for religious and philosophical beliefs, as found by the Welsh High Court in September 2022.

101. The Committee notes that the Commission’s progress report outlines developments in three categories which may be described as green, amber and red. The Committee recommends that the Department commit to completing work to a “green” status on all recommendations by end 2026.

102. The Committee considers that the rights lens is a constructive tool which allows objective discussion of rights and responsibilities and crucially recognises not only that each person has intrinsic (or inalienable) dignity, but that human behaviour can unchecked take the path of least resistance. They oppose any notion of privilege before the law or that might be right.

103. The Committee is advised that discussion of power dynamics is key to airing and maintaining right behaviour in relationships, particularly if one party has significant social and physical power and considers this a right and entitlement without considering the responsibilities they also hold to respect and protect the rights of others. Assertion of boundaries, communication of consent and respect for individual bodily autonomy are key learns if our young people are to thrive in their social lives, friendships and in due course, intimate relationships.

104. Among other contributors concerned with access to rights were Women's Platform, Alliance for Choice, National Secular Society and NICCY, who all referred to and sought consistent alignment with CEDAW and other international frameworks for RSE.

105. Alliance for Choice, NIHRC, WPG NI, ICNI based their submissions on awareness and promulgation of legal rights around reproductive health education, equipping both young men and women with the information to have healthful lives and relationships and in due course to be informed to plan futures and family.     

106. NIHRC, Women's Platform, NICCY highlighted what they envisaged as a helpful paradigm shift, discussing the potential implications of UN recommendations for NI education policy as very positive in expanding teaching about risk to equipping with critical analysis skills and empowered resilience.

107. The Gillen Review recognised the role that RSE plays in the prevention of sexual offences. Sir John Gillen argued that “the Department of Education, has a duty to play a positive role in addressing the justice gap that exists in our approach to serious sexual offences”14 and recommended that “the Department of Education draw up a plan to exhort all schools to include these matters within their curriculum and, if that proves ineffective, to be the subject of legislation mandating such education”.

 

Comparative approaches to RSE

108. RaISe advised the Committee of comparative approaches as follows.

109. In the EU, most Member States have an education policy framework or a law, which explicitly includes sexuality education or ensures the right of children to education and health promotion knowledge. As of November 2019, sexuality education was mandatory in most Member States of the European Union, except for Lithuania, Spain, Italy, Croatia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. Nonetheless, there remains considerable variation in the content, mode of delivery and objectives of sexuality education. Limited teacher training is provided across EU Member States and monitoring and evaluation is rare.

 

England

110. Since September 2020, all primary schools have been required to teach relationships education, and all secondary schools must teach relationships and sex education (RSE).  This applies to all schools in England, including independent schools.

111. Parents have the right to request that their child be withdrawn from some or all of the sex education delivered as part of the statutory RSE. The guidance states that, except in exceptional circumstances, the school should respect the parents’ request to withdraw their child up to three terms before the child turns 16. After that point, if the child wishes to receive sex education, the school should arrange to provide the child with sex education during one of those terms. However, this does not apply to relationships education or health education from which there is no right to withdraw.

112. The State of UK Boys | 14

113.  “While relationships and sex education has been a statutory part of the English curriculum since 2020 (with direction to ensure it is LGBT-inclusive), conversations about “maintaining childhood innocence” continue to dominate relationships and sexuality education practice. Indeed, discussions around sex and sexuality are deemed an optional part of the curriculum (Morgan and Taylor, 2019; Johnson, 2022; Atkinson et al., 2022).

114. In terms of LGBTQ inclusion, school discipline often involves homophobia for discipline, as described in research where a primary school teacher “jokingly” accuses two boys of same-sex love to get them to stop messing around (Atkinson and DePalma, 2008).

115. Additionally, some have noted that if LGBTQ issues are addressed only in relation to risk (of bullying or poor mental health), it can undermine attempts to identify and speak about broader issues (Gilbert et al., 2018)

 

Scotland

116. Relationships, sexual health and parenthood (RSHP) education is taught as part of the health and wellbeing curriculum area of Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence. Aspects of RSHP may also be discussed in other areas of the curriculum.  RSHP education continues to be non-mandatory in all types of schools.  This means that there is no obligation to provide consistent RSHP education throughout a child’s time at school.¹⁰

117. The Scottish Government published statutory guidance on RSHP education for local authority managed schools in 2014.¹¹ The guidance states that schools are advised that it is “good practice” to consult children, young people and parents when developing or reviewing RSHP education programmes.

118. Parents and carers can withdraw a child from sexual health education lessons after due consideration. But if the child is at secondary school, the guidance states that “young people will often be capable of deciding themselves” whether or not to take part in lessons, depending on “their maturity, understanding, and experience”. Their decision should be respected.

 

Republic of Ireland

119. Arising from a 2018-19 review of RSE in primary and post-primary schools, the need to update the Social, Personal and Health Education (SPHE) curriculum was identified as a key priority. This updating work began with Junior Cycle SPHE and is now focused on the redevelopment of the Senior Cycle SPHE curriculum.

120. The proposed content has proved divisive, with several parents’ groups concerned about the “promotion of transgender ideology” to young students. In contrast, some advocacy groups say these issues are “core to our human identity”¹².

121. The Minister for Education Norma Foley, confirmed that parents would still have the right to withdraw their children from RSE classes:

“I want to be clear around this: we operate in our schools a spirit of partnership with our parents, the wider section of stakeholders and partners within education. We retain within our school’s parental consent at all times for parents to feel that they have freedom to withdraw their students from anything that is happening within a school environment.”¹³

122. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA), the body responsible for the new curriculum, has noted that requests for withdrawal from specific aspects of SPHE or complete opt-out will require further consideration in the context of implementation of an updated curriculum in which learning in RSE is now integrated across SPHE.¹⁴

 

 

Part 2

Current Provision

Curriculum Integration and Content

123. Since the revised Northern Ireland Curriculum was introduced in 2007, Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) has been a statutory component of the following key areas of learning:

• Personal Development and Mutual Understanding in the primary curriculum (includes Foundation stage, Key Stage 1, and Key Stage 2);¹⁵
  
• Personal Development and Home Economics statements of requirement for Key Stage 3;¹⁶ and
• Personal Development strand of Learning for Life and Work at Key Stage 4.¹⁷
  
• The legal minimum content for each area learning strand is set out as high-level areas of learning in The Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order (Northern Ireland) 2007¹⁸
  

124. Issues relating to RSE may also be taught as part of other subjects including Religious Education, Biology, History, Drama and English.

125. The Department of Education (DE) requires all grant-aided schools to have an RSE policy, reflective of the school’s ethos, subject to consultation with parents and pupils, and endorsed by the Board of Governors.¹⁹ Schools have flexibility in how they develop and deliver their RSE taught programme.²⁰ Beyond the minimum content, teachers are expected to ‘provide a balance of experiences’²¹ drawn from a list of examples by the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA). However, the examples and other resources from CCEA (see section 2.2 for further detail) are not in themselves statutory.

126. The role of the Board of Governors and the Principal is to exercise their respective functions in relation to the school so as to ensure that the revised curriculum is effectively delivered as required by law.²² It is the responsibility of the Board of Governors of each school to ensure that a comprehensive programme is delivered which meets the needs of its pupils and aligns with its RSE policy.²³

127. DE advises that “With regard to Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) delivered in schools, Circular 2024/1 provides guidance in relation to the provision of RSE in all grant-aided schools following the Secretary of State’s amendments to the Learning for Life and Work (LLW) curriculum at key stages 3 and 4.

128. Key findings by the Committee in relation to curriculum content and integrations are that RSE is inconsistently embedded across the curriculum stages; there is significant variation in content, depth and inclusivity between schools; and a lack of statutory clarity has led to gaps in delivery.

129. Contributors such as WPG NI, NICCY, NASUWT called for definition and provision of mandatory, scientifically accurate, and inclusive content.

130. Stakeholders such as HerNI, Rainbow Project, Women's Platform, Faith Voices for Reproductive Justice also urged that all schools should address and reflect changing gender stereotypes and gender dysphoria or questioning; represent same-sex as well as heterosexual attraction; and include examples, case studies, etc that represent family diversity.

131. A specific consideration for the Committee is the need to ensure that the recommendations of the Gillen Review Gillen in relation to RSE for pupils with special educational needs (SEN) are implemented and monitored, and as the Independent Autism Reviewer for NI and ICNI advised, that the Department ensure accessibility for all students to RSE. The Committee commends the work of Informing Choices and particularly its ‘Just Ask’ materials in creating structured and supported conversations that assist such young people with relationship and consent queries.

 

Curriculum review analysis

132. The Curriculum Review provides a useful framework for RSE reform because it argues against both extremes: leaving too much to individual schools, and over-prescribing in a way that removes professional judgement. Applied to RSE, the key message is to set clear minimum expectations centrally, but allow schools flexibility over age-appropriate context, sequencing, resources and engagement with their communities.

Curriculum Reform Principle	Application to RSE Teaching
Purpose-Led	RSE should be explicitly linked to the wider purpose of education: helping young people make informed and responsible decisions, develop and individual, contributors to society, and lifelong learners. This supports framing RSE as safeguarding, wellbeing, citizenship and personal development – not as an optional or marginal add-on.
Knowledge Rich	RSE should include clear, age-appropriate core knowledge: bodies, puberty, consent, healthy relationships, contraception, sexual health, online safety, pornography, coercion, abuse, equality and rights. The Review stresses that knowledge enables young people to reason, participate and make informed choices; this applies strongly to RSE.
Continuous and Coherent	RSE should be sequenced across key stages, not delivered as isolated one-off lessons. Pupils should build from early learning about respect, boundaries, emotions and friendships, through puberty and online safety, towards consent, intimate relationships, contraception, sexual health and abuse prevention. This avoids repetition, gaps and abrupt transitions
Specific and Focused	The Review identifies lack of specificity as a cause of gaps, inconsistency, repetition, workload and vulnerability to parental pressure. For RSE, this supports a clearly defined statutory minimum

 

133. The principles of the Curriculum Review support reform of RSE through a clearer, more specific and better sequenced statutory entitlement, underpinned by central resources and teacher professional learning, while preserving appropriate school flexibility over context, pace and engagement with pupils and parents.

134. The most directly relevant point for the Committee is that the Review identifies lack of specificity as a major weakness of the existing curriculum, contributing to gaps in learning, variation between schools, repetition or omission of content, teacher workload and susceptibility to pressure about what is or is not taught. That analysis maps very closely onto the evidence often raised in this and other RSE inquiries.

 

Policy Implementation and School Compliance

135. The rubrics of policy implementation centred on discussion of how involved parents, teachers and pupils were in the co-creation of RSE policies; whether they had seen or were aware of it; whether parents had been made aware of the legislative changes to mandatory content and the recommendations for education of the Gillen Review; whether they could track those strategic changes to revisions of the policy at school level, etc.

136. Educators also discussed their level of awareness of the content prescribed; their level of comfort in delivery of such material; their thoughts on how age appropriate and suitable it was; and whether they could discuss these issues with school leaders or governors. Some educators advised that they would absolutely wish to have a right of conscientious objection to RSE.

137. The Committee heard that:

a) School-level RSE policies are inconsistent and often outdated

b) Stakeholder consultation varies significantly

c) Parental withdrawal policies are applied unevenly

138. Parentkind, CSTS and CARE NI stressed the importance of parental involvement in RSE policy.  

139. Parentkind, Education Authority, NASUWT and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine emphasised the need for curriculum transparency and consultation so parents could complement at home what they know their child is learning or about to learn in school.     

140. NIHRC, Faith Voices for Reproductive Justice and NASUWT expressed concerns over parental withdrawal rights in the interests of the development of the child, and conscious that peers may repeat material inaccurately or pupils may seek information somewhere else less trustworthy.

141. Parentkind, Education Authority, and CARE NI highlighted issues around transparency and consultation, and conflicts between parental rights and pupil entitlements in the policy creation and withdrawal processes were identified.

 

Resources and Support for RSE

142. The Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People reinforced strong support for age-appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically accurate RSE, consistent with NICCY’s long-standing advocacy.

143. CCEA provides curricular content and resources to support the teaching and learning of RSE. CCEA’s resources are central so feedback on them is significant. The Committee did not gather the materials of other providers and is not in a position to evaluate them but notes the views of other contributors in regard to these materials, as below.

144. CCEA launched an RSE Hub in 2019 which provides guidance, curriculum resources, and sources to support the delivery of RSE. CCEA has also published the RSE Progression Framework which provides a non-statutory progression pathway in RSE from the Foundation Stage to post-16. The hub was inaccessible for some months during the Committees process while it was being updated; Circular 2024/1 notes that the RSE Hub was relaunched in 2024 with updated guidance and resources to support teachers to address sensitive issues with their pupils.

145. CCEA is also developing case studies which reflect best practice in RSE, and key stage appropriate resources which use terms related to the legislation and health definitions. The Education Authority (EA) will provide training for teachers and Boards of Governors in respect of the new requirements.

146. The guidance states that teachers should co-design and participate in RSE lessons. While schools can choose to use external providers, DE states that the use of external providers should supplement and enhance the curricular teaching of RSE; it should not be a substitute for it.

147. The Committee noted observations from some commentators that materials were in some instances exclusively heteronormative; that they inadvertently imported gendered expectations; or that they had a harm/risk emphasis rather than a right based one. NIHRC highlighted the need to critically check against unwitting assumptions in framing resources, pointing out that for instance, young people and especially girls are rights bearers in relationship, rather than simply minors vulnerable to victimisation. This example was given to show that another framing of resource materials might instead emphasise resilience and measures to stop perpetration.  The Commission is now content that these materials have been revised appropriately.

148. The Committee found that the progression described by CCEA was comprehensive and could be tailored to the age or maturity of individual pupils; and that its resources addressed many of the concerns of young people with very up to date terms such as up-skirting and down-blousing as well as helpful resources for LGBTQIA+ pupils. The hub also signals to schools to check content for consistency with ethos.

149. The Committee commends the CCEA hub to parents, schools and pupils and anticipates that its editors will address the issues raised in feedback.

150. CSTS also described a comprehensive approach to RSE with progression and teacher calibration. The body referred to its Flourish materials which can flexibly be used in an age-appropriate way at the discretion of the teacher and depending on the maturity or needs of the individual pupil; these were created for pupils one year ahead in the RoI school system but teachers advised that they were welcome given that the needs of pupils to have critical information and resources may in some cases span that year depending on the individual and their experiences.

151. NASUWT, National Secular Society, Humanists UK, Women's Platform and PCI registered concerns over ideological bias in external RSE programs; and NASUWT, Ulster Teachers Union, CARE NI and Methodist Church in Ireland recommended good practice evaluation of third-party RSE content.       

152. Women's Aid NI advised on best practices for collaboration with NGOs and specialists; EA Youth Service wrote to the Committee to outline a very comprehensive roll-out of programmes; and Invisible Traffick highlighted how its lottery funded programmes to raise awareness of child exploitation and trafficking complemented RSE in schools.

 

Bullying, mental health and RSE

153. The case has been strongly made by many contributors including the Mental Health Champion, Children’s Commissioner (NICCY) and authors such as Prof Paul Downes, that issues of identity which are often the basis for bullying might be better understood and destigmatised if they were well aired and carefully discussed in RSE. 

154. Paul Downes made and evidenced a strong point in relation to the fear of bullying; even if someone is not the subject of the bullying, they will leave a culture that permits it as soon as they can. This is a significant observation borne out by pupils not returning to school after covid for reasons such as bullying, and its impacts on attendance appear to persist. He cited studies with large-scale samples across many jurisdictions on the long-term impacts of bullying on physical health, mental health and educational attainment or engagement, stressing that these were education as well as health issues.  He also evidenced that bullying at school was not only a child welfare issue but a child protection issue, and such a significant adverse experience as to count as an adverse childhood experience (ACE). He advocated for trauma informed approaches and support for teachers.

155. As the matter had arisen in evidence sessions, Professor Downes was asked about equivocation between ethos and inclusion. He advised that such a position risked allowing bullying to go unchecked.

156. Dr Olwyn Marks’ evidence to the Committee conveyed vast experience and understanding of the flexibility and specificity of this area of the curriculum. She advised that “Within, for example, a school's Christian framework, a school should certainly have the freedom to present its values, but in doing so, it should do it in a certain invitational way that allows young people to consider those values, not in a way that imposes those values on young people.

157. The values that I identified, which include courage, humility and kindness, can come from a Christian perspective, but others have those values. That is why we need to think about having a shared values framework”.

158. She stressed the importance of consultation and co-creation to make RSE policy, saying that “It is through that policy that schools establish what those values are. That provides an opportunity for young people, parents, governors and all those with a shared interest in RSE to name what those values are so that they are embedded in an RSE policy even before there is a lesson.”

159. The Addressing Bullying in Schools implementation team (ABSIT) advised the Committee that it provided case studies to help schools work through such clashes and has worked up a series of proformas to gather necessary baseline information for monitoring the kinds of bullying that occur. CCEA guidance to teachers also helps support and inform teachers in creating safe spaces for discussion in class, teaching without anger, teaching with empathy.

160. Dr Olwyn Marks again: “Guidance that CCEA has developed around teaching controversial issues and identifying what those are as regards issues on which people hold conflicting or opposing viewpoints… I think of teacher training. This is one subject area where we need to think about how we resource teachers and others delivering RSE to handle those issues and to teach them in a way that is respectful of other people. That means that teachers or pupils do not have to affirm every understanding of human identity and sexuality, yet they can be respectful of everybody in the classroom.

161. Tolerance and respect are important values for our free society, so we need to think about how we embed those into RSE. We increasingly need to create environments of tolerance and respect for people in our classrooms that recognise that people come with different beliefs and values to that subject as they do to many other important subjects”.

162. This is a very significant task, and while teachers are central to creating an inclusive environment in the classroom, on a whole-school basis they should ideally be supported in countering bullying by an interdisciplinary team, with for instance the school nurse and therapist. Professor Downes also advocates strongly for 1:1 emotional counselling support as a catalyst for achievement.

 

Key Findings:

• Access to CCEA resources and the RSE Hub is uneven
• Concerns raised about ideological bias in some third-party materials

Supporting Evidence:

• Conflicting views on use of resources by faith-based and advocacy groups (e.g. NSS, CCMS, CARE NI)
• Call for vetting of external content against educational standards

 

Teacher Training and External Providers

163. CSTS summed up the balance most contributors saw as ideal when it advised that “As long as the students are clear that the staff have brought in a programme for a purpose and that they will have an opportunity afterwards to talk about and explore the issues further, that programme can be very useful. In the main, however, it is about skilling up the school's teachers so that we hopefully get to a point at which the vast majority of the programme can be delivered by the teachers whom the students are used to teaching them day-to-day”.

164. Relate, NSPCC, and Women’s Aid deliver programmes which address specific elements of an RSE curriculum, and schools can plan their offering by complementing such external sessions with class discussions, exercises and lessons delivered by the teachers themselves. This approach can also enhance teacher awareness and confidence so that knowledge transfer is effected every time an external provider attends a school, if resource allows.

165. There is significant recognition of the need for specialised training in RSE delivery and considerable support for evidence-based teacher education programmes, a topic addressed strongly by Education Authority, NASUWT, PolicyWise, Ulster Teachers Union and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, among others.

166. Equally, many witnesses (such as CSTS, NASUWT, Ulster Teachers Union Education Authority, ICNI) dealt with the challenges faced by educators in handling sensitive topics. Therefore, in addition to the need for teacher professional training at college and on a continuous professional development basis, witnesses recommend that ideally RSE should be coordinated, developed and delivered by subject specialists who are confident and comfortable with the material.

Key Findings:

• Teachers lack confidence in delivering sensitive RSE content
• CPD opportunities are limited and not mandatory
• External provider quality and alignment varies widely

Supporting Evidence:

• NASUWT, UTU, and Education Authority highlight teacher readiness challenges
• Questions raised over consistency and vetting of NGO-led delivery

 

Monitoring and Evaluation

167. Equality Commission for NI recommended tracking the effectiveness of RSE programs and working to understand withdrawal rates and reasons.    

168. The Mental Health Champion too advocated assessing long-term impacts on students.

169. CARE NI, Methodist Church in Ireland and Presbyterian Church in Ireland wished to understand withdrawal rates and reasons.

170. As the inspectorate has responsibility for monitoring of both bullying and RSE, the Committee considers that it should be allocated greater capacity and tasked to twin these objectives.

Key Findings:

• No consistent mechanisms for monitoring RSE delivery or effectiveness
• ETI involvement is limited in scope

Supporting Evidence

• NIHRC and Equality Commission NI recommend more robust monitoring tools
• Data on withdrawal rates is lacking

 

Stakeholder Engagement and Inclusivity

171. Evidence underpinning the Jack trial suggests that “barriers to parental-adolescent communication on sexual behaviours are relayed through parental perspectives that suggest that their religious and cultural beliefs are opposed to sex before marriage or adolescent sex — that would be a barrier; their own embarrassment about the issue or their adolescents' embarrassment; their own perceptions of their poor knowledge and skills in doing this; and a perception or misconception that if they talk to their child about those issues, they may, in fact, be encouraging the young person's early sexual activity”.(Prof Maria Lohan).

172. Prof Lohan advised that boys, in particular, often disengage from CSE — “disengage at best and, sometimes, at worst, can be disruptive in classes, actually. They can be somewhat alienated from RSE and, often, we focus it in on girls”.

173. She advises that “gender-sensitive programmes also bring boys into the mix and talk about positive masculinity. Culturally sensitive programmes are ones that young people can identify with. In my work here, we developed resources specifically with Northern Ireland in mind, but also the four nations of the UK, so we had slightly different versions for Northern Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales (including for Irish-medium schools)”.

174. LGBTQIA+: The Youth Assembly advised that over 40% of pupils think schools not sufficiently welcoming and inclusive on LGBTQIA+ basis. The Human Rights Commission study found that too many schools are not addressing LGBTQIA+ issues; gender identity; sexual identity; physical safety; consent; online safety. The Rainbow Project and HereNI also described a dearth of information and discussion in school, noting “LGBTQIA+ young people in schools have been poorly served and, both historically and contemporaneously, underrepresented within curriculum content. Twenty-one years after the repeal of Section 28 in England and Wales – legislation which silenced any discussion of LGBTQIA+ identities in schools across Britain but excluding Northern Ireland – LGBTQIA+ identities are still being branded ‘controversial’ and avoided by many schools in this region. LGBTQIA+ young people within our services (including our Rainbow Youth group in Foyle and the Cara-Friend youth group in Belfast) have told us that their lack of representation into the law and procedures in serious sexual offences in NI in education has left them feeling ‘lost’, ‘left out and forgotten’ and ‘confused, with nowhere to turn to.”

175. These witnesses advised that 2017 DE research yielded disappointing feedback: two thirds of young LGBTQIA+ people surveyed stated that the RSE they had received was unhelpful, with 90% of respondents stating that the RSE they received made no reference to LGBTQIA+ relationships and identities. Research published at a similar time by LGBTQIA+ organisation Cara-Friend found that 84% of pupils surveyed indicated that they had received no information or support regarding sexual orientation or gender identity within their school. At the same time, 72% of LGBTQIA+ youth experienced negative attitudes in school, and 68% had experienced bullying.

176. A majority of respondents to the mini-inquiry agreed that content should be fully inclusive of all young people. A number of respondents including the NIHRC agreed that content should be evidence-based and designed by experts in the field. Prof Brown emphasized the need for experts with knowledge and experience of the relationship and sexuality needs and concerns of people with all sexual identities.

177. CCEA stated that schools should also recognise the diversity of family life today, particularly the fact that some children may have gay, lesbian or bisexual parents or carers, some of whom may be in a civil partnership. “All staff should be sensitive and respectful of difference, ensuring that no pupil ever feels or is excluded, or experiences bullying due to their family or home circumstances”.

178. Inclusivity can similarly be a challenge for teachers and Boards of Governors when calibrating messaging in cohesion with a faith ethos in school. Guidance advises that teachers may discuss moral, ethical and spiritual issues associated with RSE minimum content, and some commentators have pointed out that this is worth removing as it may conflict with requirements that RSE be evidence-led; whereas others find this perspective perhaps artificial. For instance, the Transferor Representatives’ Council (TRC) argued that RSE cannot be value‑neutral. Dr Andrew Brown said: “RSE must consider the whole person — physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually — and should be taught in a way that respects the school’s ethos.” He added: “Critical thinking involves the breadth of world views… You cannot take a neutral stance on RSE.”

179. On a practical level, engagement and consultation with parents and pupils on the content of and any changes to school policies and transparency and awareness raising regarding the strategic aims, ethos and roll-out of programmes are good practice in stakeholder engagement. Inclusivity should also be addressed not only in terms of gender, but with reference to socioeconomic, racial, disability, cultural and other intersectionality.

180. Several witnesses advised that our context is one of collective/intergenerational trauma and requires a trauma-informed approach, saying that this may help address seemingly intractable issues such as bullying. Inclusivity and faith-based ethos can create a clash in labelling, othering or excluding on the one hand and LGBT young person or a faith-based young person on the other.

181. The Mental Health Champion advocated for kindness in not having conversations that required such a clash to occur and spoke impactfully about the terrible and lasting damage such a clash could have not only on mental health but on a young person’s self-esteem and security in their identity.

182. The Committee discussed such approaches.  Most members advocate, for harm minimisation, teaching without othering as though there is diversity in the classroom, even though the teacher may not be aware of it. Some members felt it was disingenuous not to work with the world as it is and preferred the approach of having respectful discussions which addressed matters of identity.

183. Non-violent communication (NVC) is a method of objective listening and inquiry that can be deployed to depersonalise motivations and observe rather than blame; this is a very accessible framework and may assist in potentially thorny discussions. Similarly, Dr Suzanne Whitten of the Critical Civility Project proposes the use of philosophy tools through critical enquiry to develop skills and habits such as critical thinking, empathetic reasoning and reasonableness in children. The Committee is advised that these approaches are capable of reframing difficult discussions in a non-adversarial way.

184. Youth engagement entails not only space and voice, but impact and influence. NiCCY Youth Panel; Youth Assembly, Diverse Ni, Belfast Youth Forum, Voypic; these young people provided advocacy in the Committee’s process and were supported in their work by trusted adults who help them remain resilient.

185. Representation of Activism about RSE: Alliance for Choice told the story of their activism for access to reproductive rights, a campaign that eventuated in the legislative reform at the centre of this inquiry. They advised that they struggle to see effective delivery of the rights-based healthcare messages the law affords. They consider that this is because such messages are not compatible with school ethos. They continue to work to reduce this resistance and improve implementation of the legislative reforms, and they appealed to the Committee to uphold the reforms for young women and for efficacy of the law. 

186. NICCY, Parentkind Dr Suzanne Whitten and youth panels addressed youth concerns about RSE gaps; HerNI - Rainbow Project endorsed the important role of peer education and youth advocacy. Also, NICCY, HerNI - Rainbow Project, Dr. Sophie King-Hill emphasised the value of ensuring diverse youth representation in RSE policy-making. 

 

Impact of Withdrawal Policies

187. The Human Rights Commission and others explained the rights arguments for and against withdrawal.

188. Throughout the mini-inquiry DUP members have been steadfast in defending parents as being best placed to determine what is in the interests of their child and in arguing that the ethos and values of our schools should be respected.

189. In respect of the right to withdraw from aspects of RSE, the NIHRC advised that the UN CEDAW Committee whose recommendations were legislated for by the Secretary of State did not foresee that a right to withdraw should be granted, in the interests of the social good of young people being well advised and informed so as to access reproductive rights safely and in a timely way.

190. However, it also described the relationship between the right to education and the right of parents to have their child educated in keeping with their religious and philosophical convictions under the ECHR, the most directly accessible human rights mechanism here.  “Article 2 of the 1st Protocol safeguards access to education”, and “grafted onto that, the State, in fulfilling its functions in relation to education and teaching, must ensure that the information included in the curriculum is conveyed in an objective and pluralistic manner. In Kjeldsen v Denmark (1976), the ECtHR highlighted that:

191. “Parents therefore may “not refuse a child’s right to education” on the basis of their religious and philosophical convictions. Rather, the second sentence of Article 2 of Protocol No 1 aims to safeguard pluralism in education to protect the democratic society envisaged by the Convention”.

192. Research prepared for the Committee by RaISE presented approaches to withdrawal policies in Scotland, England and the Republic of Ireland. A judicial review of the new Wales curriculum (which does not permit parental opt-out from RSE) upheld the Government’s decision not to do so, with the court opining that “Openness to a plurality of ideas and the ability to engage sensitively, critically, and respectfully with such debates, which RSE seeks to encourage and develop, fully accords with the aim of pluralism in a liberal and democratic state”.

193. In the similar case, Dojan and Others v. Germany, parents who wanted to remove their children from mandatory sex education classes and theatre workshops were fined and on non-payment, imprisoned. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) said that the classes entailed “neutral transmission of knowledge regarding procreation, contraception, pregnancy and child birth in accordance with the underlying legal provisions and the ensuing guidelines and the curriculum, which were based on current scientific and educational standards”, as such “consonant with the principles of pluralism and objectivity embodied in Article 2 of Protocol No 1”; and further advised that the Convention “does not guarantee the right not to be confronted with opinions that are opposed to one’s own convictions”.

194. Practicalities of withdrawal policies were discussed with witnesses such as CSTS, and the Committee clarified with the Department certain of the arrangements and also the position for home schoolers in relation to educating their child on the newly mandatory material.

195. The Committee represented different perspectives in relation to withdrawal policies and asked the Department to set out in correspondence the precise steps to be taken.

196. DE replied as follows.

197. “Circular 2024/1 provides guidance in relation to the provision of RSE in all grant-aided schools following the Secretary of State’s amendments to the Learning for Life and Work (LLW) curriculum at key stages 3 and 4. The Circular provides guidance in respect of the circumstances in which a parent can request to have a pupil excused from the new elements of RSE. Requests should be made in writing and addressed to the principal of the grant aided school at which the pupil is registered and identify the pupil to whom the request relates. It should be specified whether the request relates to all of Article 5(1A education or specified elements of that education and confirm which element or elements are contrary to their wishes. They are not required to provide a reason to the school. Where the circumstances prescribed in the Regulations are met, the pupil will be excused from the education prescribed by the Secretary of State. However, the exception would be a pupil in year 12 were they object to being excused. It would be considered good practice for the school to offer to discuss the request with parents and, as appropriate, with the pupil. This would ensure that the wishes of the parent and their child are understood. This also provides an opportunity to outline the benefits of receiving this important education and any possible detrimental effect opting out might have.

198. “The school should retain a record of the request and provide an acknowledgement of it. It is recommended the request should be made during the school year in which the pupils are going to be receiving the comprehensive, age-appropriate and scientifically accurate education on sexual and reproductive health and rights covering prevention of early pregnancy and access to abortion. Where a pupil has been excused from Article 5(1A) education, the excusal remains in force until the end of the school year in which the request was made or, in the case of a specified element, until that education has been completed. It should be noted that the statutory right to be excused relates solely to the new elements prescribed by the regulations brought into force by the Secretary of State. There is no automatic right to be excused from other elements of RSE”.

199. Concerns over parental withdrawal rights were expressed by NIHRC, Faith Voices for Reproductive Justice, and NASUWT. A majority of written respondents did not agree that parents should be able to withdraw their children from RSE topics and considered this to be a safeguarding risk.

200. ICNI, too, argue that they do not agree with parents being able to withdraw children from RSE as not all children and young people live within safe households, or are involved in healthy relationships.

201. Several faith-based respondents argue that parents should have the right to decide what their child is educated in and tend to support parental withdrawal.

202. Care NI highlight that there is a fine line between balancing the rights of children and parents/carers and setting those rights against one another; they strongly affirm the primacy of parents’ decision-making within education.

203. CARE NI, Methodist Church in Ireland, Presbyterian Church in Ireland among others were concerned with the need to understand withdrawal rates and reasons. 

204. The aim of public good and of everyone receiving the same set of standards of acceptable behaviour and expected responsibilities towards others can be particularly valuable in regard to pupils from varied cultural backgrounds. For instance, some educators advised the Committee that cultural differences might be a reason for withdrawal; but there was feedback from BME groups that it could equally be culturally very difficult in some BME families to broach topics such as RSE, and that if pupils did not receive information and guidance at school, they might have no information, trusted advisor, or critical friend.

205. The Committee considers that the Department should seek to collate and monitor withdrawal statistics and the reasons for withdrawal; it also recommends that schools engage in parental engagement to communicate and demystify the materials used and topics addressed, so that withdrawals will be minimal.

 

Violence against Women and Girls

206. Given that the impetus for the inquiry was legislative change recommended by the Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, to tackle misogyny and societal attitudes that subjugate and objectify women is surely a primary driver of reform of RSE. The Executive Strategy on Ending Violence against Women and Girls references an overriding power imbalance between men and women in Northern Ireland, a “culture of entitlement perpetuated by the male dominance in this society” which leaves women vulnerable to violence and abuse.

207. Additional power imbalances which may impact school-age pupils include respective age and experience, positions of authority and relative lack of privilege, and intersectional factors that affect social capital.

208. The Committee heard that bystander intervention and allyship work, rights-based concepts of citizenship and responsibilities, co-ed discussion, trauma informed approaches, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, ethics, civics, Non-Violent Communication and programmes created by survivors of violence or other abuse are central to an RSE content prescription that can help change the dynamic for the better in our society. Women’s Aid advised that “The women, children and young people in our services tell us really clearly that they want children and young people to know the difference between a loving and healthy relationship and the unacceptable behaviours outside that. We want to give them the confidence and ability to draw the line at abuse”.

209. The Female Voices project drew together analyses of misogyny in and outside school and created materials for age appropriate, co-ed discussion of some of these underlying and damaging assumptions. The Committee has already shared these with the NI Assembly’s Women’s Caucus and commended the young women to TedXStormont. The Committee includes the project report in the appendices to this report and recommends this useful tool to share safe discussion and address harmful myths.

210. The importance of education around consent was recognised by a majority of contributors and referenced in connection with Lord Gillen’s recommendations, which the Committee supports:

“4. Measures should be introduced at the outset of the trial to combat rape

myths for example, jury educational material, a short video and written judicial

directions. In the wider context there is a need for an extensive public awareness and school education campaign.

 

52. The Department of Justice and the Department of Education should speedily draw up plans for an awareness campaign through schools, television, radio, outdoor and internet advertising specifically on the myths surrounding serious sexual offences.

 

87. The Department of Education should strongly encourage Boards of school

governors to introduce awareness sessions to ensure students understand the

consequences of posting on social media.

 

88. The Department of Education, in consultation with the NICTS, should take steps to strongly encourage secondary schools to include in their Learning for Life and Work curriculum instruction on juries, jury responsibilities and contempt laws in order to encourage greater civic responsibilities among internet users.

 

181. The Department of Education should address the need to include in the school curriculum for disabled children, children with sensory disability and those who are members of marginalised communities’ sex education designed in a culturally sensitive manner on matters such as consent, personal space,

boundaries, appropriate behaviour, relationships, fears of homophobia and

transphobia, gender identity and sexuality”

 

211. The Committee also advocates for positive initiatives for boys to integrate them in solutions and cohesion with girls.

212. All written responses share the opinion that adequate RSE is essential to tackling VAWG in our society. Women’s Platform state that the EU Directive on combating violence against women and girls does not specify a curriculum, although it emphasises the importance of access to information. The NIHRC recommends that the RSE curriculum should include violence against women and girls as a mandatory component and that this should reflect international standards. The Committee encourages the Department to prescribe such mandatory, objective and pluralistic content to be neutrally delivered within its ongoing exercise in curriculum review.

213. Best practice attested at Committee included EA Youth Work initiatives; Women's Aid NI age appropriate and cocreated programmes. Humanists UK and NASUWT also advocated that like these actors, RSE must seek to address underlying assumptions by teaching consent and healthy relationships.

214. Women's Aid NI, WPG NI, Alliance for Choice, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine advise strategies for preventing gender-based violence and domestic abuse. A child survivor of domestic abuse also presented to the Committee her campaign to help other children avoid the loneliness she felt in school as her family circumstances deteriorated.

215. Women's Aid NI, Mental Health Champion, Dr Sophie King-Hill, CSTS advocate trauma-informed approaches (TIA) in RSE.

216. The Safeguarding Board NI offers a toolkit for trauma-informed approaches free on its website.  This notes that, certainly it is accepted that this jurisdiction has its own unique structures, e.g. in politics and education. “The legacy of the troubles/the conflict has impacted to varying degrees on the health and wellbeing of this society and how services are delivered, however it is positive that we have experienced relative peace latterly. People new to NI may find it a complex society to understand and belong to, and perhaps it is”. Our past may have led us to cultural reticence and protective ways which impact on young people not as we intend. This awareness and a TIA lens, like the rights-based ethics, civics and philosophy approach, are tools that can help uszoom out and transform our perception of our lives, challenges and opportunities.

217. Similarly, our past has led to a conflict-resolution devolution settlement, with not only consociational community safeguards but a significant human rights underpinning.

218. The Committee has an opportunity to give young people the tools to tackle their modern problems, and most members consider that learning via a human rights lens is one objective way to do so. Some Committee members consider that teaching respect, responsibility, a faith-based ethos and a risk/harm presentation of these issues is more reliable and do not advocate a human rights approach.

219. The Committee commends a cross-departmental approach to RSE as key to VAWG, working with Justice, Health Communities and others; and suggests that these measures are taken forward within a clear Children’s Services Cooperation Act action framework.

220. Regional and central approaches presented to the Committee were welcome and complementary initiatives to school RSE: Teenagers Healthy Relationships Programme – Causeway Coast and Glens Police and Community Safety Partnership (PCSP) with Foyle Women’s Aid and Mid Ulster successfully bid for a tender to deliver in schools topics such as Relationships (Healthy/Unhealthy), Coercive Control, Consent, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence & Abusive Relationships, Self-care, Sexting & Social Media Risks and Safety Planning.

221. This was in response to need for a more centralised approach to providing age-appropriate developmental support for children and young adults at risk of engaging in unhealthy relationships with a focus on existing and emerging trends including but not exclusively limited to: Child Sexual Exploitation, Adverse Childhood Experiences, Domestic Abuse, Healthy Relationships, Rape, Consent and Sexting.

222. The PCSP wrote to the Committee and the Minister to advise that the programme was evaluated very positively and should be funded centrally and consistently for all children and young adults.

223. The Evangelical Alliance presented to the Committee and emphasised that it shared significant common ground with the range of contributors. It continues ongoing work with young men to counter some of the sense of futility that may make them feel resentful of young women, within its work for the Lost Boys initiative with the Centre for Social Justice.

224. Children in Northern Ireland (CINI) not only contributed to the inquiry but is continuing  to work with OFCOM to reduce online harms; consulting young people to understand their experience and engaging with issues of reporting harm online, a lack of reporting for misogyny per se and a sense that reporting is not being taken seriously by social media platforms.

225. ‘State of our Boys’ academic article as referenced above outlines macrolevel ways to look at boys and the various hierarchies they struggle with.

226. Smartphone Free Childhood campaign however had chilling statistics about girls self-harming and presenting with suicidal ideation at A&E – whereas boys may act out their distress in hurtful or violent behaviour, the concern is that girls turn inward the toxic feedback they receive and hurt themselves.

227. NASUWT presented recently to the Committee and expressed significant experience and alarm at the increase of sexualisation of and assaults on female teachers, classroom assistants and support staff. They requested trauma-informed approach in relation to assaults. They described the difficult balance of rights when extending the right of perpetrators to education impacts very detrimentally by retraumatising or victim-blaming the victim of assault. They recommended the whole school, victim-centred approach advocated for by Feminista, recommending its materials and measures for enhanced protection for women and girls in school who had experienced assault and remained in class with boys who had perpetrated assault. They proposed legislation to strategically tackle the harms of tech applications which serve to promote sexualisation, assault and invasion of privacy.

228. Since the Committee finished taking evidence, one of its witnesses, Dr Susan Lagdon, has been made MBE and launched her “head, shoulders knees and toes” initiative to bring awareness to what a toxic relationship feels like.

229. UU ARK have done considerable work on taking boys seriously, with advice that would ideally apply to every pupil, not just boys:

“Educators adopting the ‘Taking Boys Seriously’ principle of boys as relational learners in practice should:

DEMONSTRATE DIGNITY AND RESPECT

• The educator displays an attitude of acceptance and affirmation, communicating to boys that they are inherently valuable and worthwhile as unique individuals irrespective of their academic ability. The educator avoids belittling, labelling, shaming, and stereotyping.
• Key research findings demonstrate: 
• Boys thrive, flourish, and enjoy learning more when they perceive that they are treated with dignity and respect.
• Indicators of success - Boys report:
  • Increased self-worth.
  • Feeling valued in the learning environment.
  • Enhanced awareness of the importance of the role of the educator in their learning journey.
  • Improved relationships with educators.
  • An appreciation and a feeling of mutual respect with educators. “

Conclusions of the Committee

230. The Committee was aware that the topic of RSE engages deeply felt beliefs and dearly held values; that there had been disinformation about legislative change which misled the public; and also, that the inquiry might have the potential to help improve safeguarding, protect young people generally and reduce violence against women and girls.

231. The Committee therefore welcomed, thanks and is indebted to the many participants who wished to contribute to the conversation. 

232. Certain additional contributors wished to present to the Committee’s mini-inquiry but given its high profile, regretfully declined due to concerns around their safety and safety of individuals they work with.

233. The Committee appreciates the work done across schools and by third sector providers and academics to help young people develop a strong sense of self; healthy life skills and boundaries; respect for others; ways to emotionally regulate and resolve differences; and to make a positive contribution to social and community structures, all of which are addressed throughout school life within the school community.

234. The Committee recognises the role played by teachers, family, youth services and other trusted adults in holding safe spaces for age-appropriate discussion and provision of reliable information about puberty, attraction, sexuality, consent, relationships, physical well-being and online safety.

235. The Committee has heard clearly and commends the public service, integrity and protection shown by the community that surrounds our young people. All members recognise the importance of safeguarding when working with children and young people.

236. Safeguarding risks for young people and violence against women and girls are very significant factors of modern life in this jurisdiction, and the Committee supports all contributors to this inquiry in their work to find child-centred and trauma-informed solutions to these existential challenges.

237. The Safeguarding Board NI toolkit notes:

“Northern Ireland (NI) has its own unique structures, e.g. in politics and education. The legacy of the troubles/the conflict has impacted to varying degrees on the health and wellbeing of NI society and how services are delivered, however it is positive that we have experienced relative peace latterly. People new to NI may find it a complex society to understand and belong to. The importance of a relational approach is emphasised throughout the key concepts which inform a trauma informed approach in the NI context. When it is understood why relationships matter and how interactions can hurt or heal, this provides an evidence base and foundational framework to apply a trauma focussed lens to all our engagements.”

---