Kate O'Connell (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all the witnesses for their attendance. I am very concerned about some of the evidence I have heard today, and many of the previous speakers have spoken well about it. I am concerned that it is down to the ethos of the school to frame sex education. Mr. Moran spoke about age-appropriate education. Deputy Bríd Smith spoke about the Dutch system. In Holland this education starts at four, when children discuss their bodies. It moves on to respect and attraction at seven and same-sex attraction between eight and nine years of age. Between ten and 11 years of age they speak about changes during puberty, love, dating and men and women in the media. They deal with this in Holland from four years of age. It is not standardised across the Netherlands but it is exceptionally comprehensive. According to the Catholic ethos when it comes to contraception, condoms are still not allowed as a means of birth control under Catholic teaching. I am concerned that the rhythm method or the withdrawal method or abstinence is being taught to children in this State. My understanding is that 90% of schools in this country are under the Catholic ethos, so I am not sure how we square that circle. I think Deputy Bríd Smith's final question to Ms Egan was whether she was happy with our sex education in this country. She never actually said she was. It is very clear to me that we have serious issues here when it comes to sex education under the Catholic ethos. I know the bishop withdrew his comments but a cleric in this country recently spoke about teenagers engaging in pure and chaste lives. I am not sure what sort of teenagers he is dealing with but his comments concerned the HPV vaccine and a rather ignorant link between it and sexual activity.

Has the Department done any work on the promotion of the HPV vaccine, which can eradicate cancer? I am concerned about how all these things feed into educating our children and about this opposing view. If the Catholic Church does not teach that barrier contraceptives are a good thing, and if HPV vaccination is not promoted very well, I would be very concerned about how we are delivering sex education. Various states in the US have different approaches to sex education. The basic statistics show that in states where sex education focuses on abstinence there is a higher rate of teenage pregnancies than in states where there is a more comprehensive approach. In New Mexico, where abstinence is taught, there are 90 teenage pregnancies per 1,000 teenagers aged 15 to 19, whereas in New Hampshire, where the education regime is not based on abstinence, the rate is 30 per 1,000. All of this feeds into the question of whether sex education in this country is fit for purpose. I believe that if it is being influenced by the ethos of the school to this degree, we cannot sit here today and say it is working. Somebody answered that there had been no complaints. I am always concerned when there are no complaints or concerns raised about an approach to something.

I am very concerned about what Deputy Bríd Smith mentioned about Accord being used as a sort of subcontractor in schools. I am really concerned about what our young people are being exposed to in terms of the approach to teaching sex education. One of the key things we learnt from the witnesses from the Netherlands who came before the committee last week was that country had destigmatised and taken a non-moralistic approach to sex education, which ultimately led to a reduction in teenage pregnancies. It also led to Dutch teenagers tending to have their first sexual experience later in their teenage years than their European counterparts. They generally report it as having been a positive and fun experience. This non-moralistic approach has worked in the Netherlands. I do not want to bring up the sexologists from last week again but this approach seems to deliver better outcomes. I am really concerned that if we are somehow being caught by this idea of ethos then we will not be serving our young people. Does Ms Egan think that we should have a standardised approach? Should we forgot ethos and try to deal with our children and young people in a way which separates the moral from the medical? Does Ms Egan have any concerns in light of what we have heard about the current system today and in light of everyone's questions and answers in that regard?