By Sylvia Mesesi
Introduction
In the contemporary world, the terms Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) and Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights (SRHR) have become prevalent, especially in schools and various learning institutions. These terms are often promoted by global institutions such as the United Nations and other International Organizations. But how deeply is their true meaning, purpose and potential impact understood?
According to the United Nations, CSE provides young people with accurate, age-appropriate information about sexuality and their sexual and reproductive health, which is critical for their health and survival. Similarly, SRHR involves access to quality sexual and reproductive health information and services. It plays a crucial role in safeguarding the well-being of each adolescent, preparing them for a safe, productive, and satisfying life. Protection from diseases, unintended pregnancies, and human rights abuses, including violence against women and discrimination.
At first glance, these initiatives can be deemed beneficial. After all, sex education is important to children and adolescents. However, beyond this surface appeal, there are major concerns that need a closer examination. To fully understand the implications of CSE and SRHR, it is crucial to explore these programs in detail and understand what they really entail.
The Controversial Issues of CSE and SRHR
I Sexualizing Children
Among its most contentious issues, CSE is criticized for exposing children to explicit content. Many programs taught under CSE promote high-risk sexual behavior as normal and even encourage children and adolescents to explore their sexuality. For example, CSE modules designed for adolescents aged 9 to 15 teach that they have “ power” to get their needs and desires met, including sexual needs. ( CSE Toolkit, Trainers Manual, P. 7) This raises a critical concern: how does this message not promote high-risk sexual behavior especially among curious young children who may naturally want to explore the power they have been told they possess?
While CSE claims to help young people “ develop the skills they need to adopt healthy behaviors and to stay safe now and, in the future,” ( United Nations Population Fund, P. 3) the reality is far more complex. CSE lessons have been revealed to act as an instruction manual for sexual activity rather than a protective educational tool. Children as young as 10 years old are taught about contraception, including using explicit models on condom use. They are told they can decide when they are “ready” for sex and are introduced to detailed discussions on different ways of obtaining sexual pleasure. “The tip of the clitoris is called the glans. It is very sensitive to touch. It fills with blood and becomes erect when a woman is sexually excited. It is the only body part in either sex whose only function is to give sexual pleasure. Touching it and the surrounding area helps a woman to get sexually excited and have an orgasm.“ (CSE For Out of School Young People in Zimbabwe , P. 46)
Another major concern is that those lessons are typically not accompanied with education on the psychological and physical health risks associated with sexual behavior. The lessons heavily focus on the obtainment of sexual pleasure, neglecting potential consequences such as emotional distress, STI’s and unplanned pregnancies. For instance, a CSE manual used in Malawi, based on materials from the PATH (Western Supported Organization), provides explicit instructions to out of school children on a range of sexual behaviors. It encourages an open and exploratory attitude towards sex in children ( CSE For Out of School Young People in Malawi , P. 94) This, combined with the normalization of sexual behavior among children raises concern as to whether this protects them or does it instead encourage sexual behavior among children.
II Undermining Parental Rights
One of the most significant controversies that surrounds CSE is how it undermines parental rights. These programs quite evidently bypass the authority and input of parents when it comes to the sexual education of their children. CSE encourages the provision of condoms and contraceptives to school-going children, including those in primary school without the need for parental consent. ( ESA Ministerial Agreement, “Young People Today, Time to Act Now,” P. 24)
Under the SRHR framework, children as young as nine years old are provided with contraceptives, including hormonal contraceptives. (The Regional Module for Teacher Training on Comprehensive Sexuality Education for East and Southern Africa, P. 297) Adolescents are encouraged to develop the confidence to purchase condoms without the approval of their parents. These programs typically promote the notion that young people have the right to access sexual reproductive health services independently. Parental Consent is often seen as an obstacle to the sexual autonomy of adolescents. ( UNFPA Operational Guidance for CSE, 2014, P. 27)
The National Adolescent and Reproductive Health and Rights (ASRHR) Framework Strategy is another notable example. This framework has already been implemented in various countries. It encourages the provision of contraceptives to minors without parental consent. It also excludes parents from being consulted in the making of these policies. These Frameworks represent a violation of parental rights. They also promote a sexual rights agenda that prioritizes sexual rights over sexual health and family values. Sidelining parents in the sexual education of their own children is not only a violation of their rights but also a potential threat to the family unit.
III Discouraging Abstinence
Traditionally, abstinence has always been promoted as the most effective way to avoid unintended pregnancies and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. However, CSE programs often present abstinence as secondary to contraceptive use. In some CSE curricula, abstinence is taught as something that must be mutually agreed upon by sexual partners, rather than a personal or moral choice an individual should make, (CSE For Out of School Young People in Malawi, P. 247). The implication is that children and adolescents should not practice abstinence because their sexual needs will not be met. As a result, focus has shifted from abstinence towards the use of contraceptives as the primary means of preventing STDs and pregnancy.
Some CSE programs suggest that abstinence is an unrealistic expectation and that it is more practical to teach them how to engage in “safe sex.” (CSE For Out of School Young People in Malawi, P. 247) By prioritizing mutual sex satisfaction and contraceptive use over abstinence, CSE may encourage early sexual experimentation. It also greatly contributes to the normalization of sexual activity among minors.
IV Promoting Controversial Ideologies
CSE programs also introduce controversial subjects to young children in ways that are insensitive to their religious, cultural and family values.
- Abortion
CSE includes abortion as a component of reproductive health rights. (CSE For Out of School Young People in Malawi, P. 235). Abortion is presented as a legitimate and necessary option for managing unintended pregnancies. CSE materials present abortion as part of the full spectrum of sexual and reproductive rights. This is often without providing balanced perspectives on the moral and ethical implications of abortion. This may in turn undermine efforts that promote life-affirming alternatives to abortion such as adoption.
- LGBTQ Ideologies
CSE also introduces children and adolescents to LGBTQ, which in many societies is highly controversial. Children are taught that gender is not determined by biological sex, but is instead fluid and subject to personal feelings and preferences. (CSE For Out of School Young People in Malawi, P. 126).
In addition, CSE teaches that families can include same-sex parents. (CSE Manual- Trainer’s Toolkit, P. 5), including in countries where homosexuality is outrightly termed illegal. This conflicts with the cultural and legal norms of many countries, especially African countries.
For more information on the controversial issues of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR), watch the YouTube video titled The War on Children: Exposing the CSE Agenda by Family Watch International (May, 2020).
The Failure of CSE
For years, UN agencies such as UNESCO have promoted CSE as a vital tool for reducing teen pregnancies, Sexually Transmitted Diseases and HIV. They also argue that abstinence only education is ineffective. However, recent studies have debunked these claims.
According to a recent global analysis published by researchers at SexEdReport.org, CSE has the highest failure rate in Africa, with an alarming 89% failure rate, and the highest rate of negative impacts, with 24% of cases reporting harmful effects. This study, titled Re-Examining the Evidence for Comprehensive Sex Education in Schools – A Global Research Review, took a comprehensive look at the very research cited by UNESCO to support CSE programs. After a thorough analysis of 103 credible studies spanning 30 years, the researchers concluded: "Three decades of research indicate that school-based comprehensive sex education has not been an effective public health strategy—it has produced only a few sustained effects on protective outcomes, with other negative impacts, in U.S. and non-U.S. settings combined. In fact, it [CSE] has shown far more evidence of failure than success and caused a concerning number of harmful effects.”
The research pointed out that despite the widespread implementation of CSE across the globe, it has failed to deliver on its promises to reduce teenage pregnancies, STDs and HIV. Further, the global study made a strong recommendation to policymakers: "Given the threat posed by STDs, HIV, and pregnancy to the health and well-being of young people worldwide, and the compelling lack of evidence of effectiveness for school-based Comprehensive Sex Education, we recommend that policymakers abandon plans for its global dissemination and pursue alternative prevention strategies for reducing the negative consequences of adolescent sexual activity. Further studies of the positive findings for abstinence education should be done to inform the development of such paradigms.”
In addition to concerns over its effectiveness, there is a huge controversy centered around the advocacy by SRH to review age consent laws. Age consent laws are country-specific; in some countries, it is 18 years, in others, it is 16 years, and in some like Nigeria, it is as low as 11 years. Age consent is important because it is the legal determination of when one is competent enough to consent to sexual acts.
Advocates of SRHR push to remove age restrictions for accessing sexual health services, including contraceptives and abortion. “These protective laws may also have important limiting effects on access to services. Legislation relating to the SRH of adolescents and young people, including the age of consent to sex and to services, should be reviewed to ensure that the appropriate balance between protection and autonomy is achieved.” (ESA Ministerial Agreement, Young People Today, Time to Act Now, P. 27)
Lowering the age of consent risks normalizing child sexual activity and potentially exposing minors to abuse and exploitation.
UN’s Stance and the Role of IPPF in Promoting CSE
The United Nations along with other organizations such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, (IPPF) has played a major role in promoting CSE and SRHR in many countries. The UNFPA in particular has a strong stance in promoting CSE as an essential part of Sexual Health Education. However, concerns about the implications of these programs are not adequately addressed by these institutions. UNFPA maintains that abstinence-only programs have proven ineffective. ( see website UNFPA.org). But just because abstinence-only programs may have been less effective in some cases, it does not justify introducing highly sexualized content to nine-year-olds and labelling it as “education.”
Documents from UNFPA and IPPF, for example, clearly demonstrate a shift in emphasis from meeting the real needs of children to advancing ideas related to sexual freedom and expression. These groups have come under fire for failing to consider the long-term effects that promoting sexual activity among children can have on their physical, emotional, and psychological well-being. For instance, IPPF's publication “Healthy, Happy, and Hot” makes the contentious claim that young people should be allowed to pursue sexual pleasure without telling their sexual partners they are HIV positive. This is a position that raises ethical and moral questions as well as concerns about public health and safety.
UN agencies, including UNFPA, often dismiss concerns about CSE and SRHR as mere misconceptions or misinformation, without addressing the legitimate concerns raised by communities and advocacy groups. In opposition to CSE, some African governments and cultural leaders have stated that it upholds principles that are incompatible with the social and religious convictions of the vast majority of their people. But these voices are often silenced, with UN bodies characterizing their concerns as outdated or irrelevant in the face of "progressive" international norms. In essence, by dismissing these concerns, UN agencies are failing to engage in meaningful dialogue with the communities they aim to serve.
An Alternative: Abstinence-Based Risk Avoidance Education
Instead of relying on CSE programs that prioritize the “right-based” approach which often prioritizes sexual rights over sexual health, we could turn to Abstinence-Based Risk Avoidance Education as a better alternative. This approach focuses on teaching the value of delaying sexual activity until when one is emotionally and physically mature enough to handle its consequences. It promotes self-respect and non-sexual relationships during the early years of development.
Abstinence-based education does not sidestep the consequences that come with sexual activities, such as unintended pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, and emotional harm. It, however, presents abstinence as the surest way of avoiding these risks. While CSE often normalizes early sexual activity through the provision of contraceptive information to children, sexual risk avoidance education focuses on developing life skills and personal boundaries that enable young people to make informed, safer choices about their future.
Critics argue that this approach denies young people the right to information, but sexual risk avoidance does not mean withholding necessary health information. Instead, it focuses on delivering this information in a way that is age and culturally sensitive without introducing explicit sexual content prematurely or encouraging experimentation.
Call to Action
It is imperative that we critically examine and address the content and implementation of CSE and SRHR in our education systems. Parents, educators, policymakers and the community at large should work together to ensure that the sexual education taught to our children is balanced, valuable and truly age-appropriate. We have a duty to protect our children against emotional and physical harm that they are being exposed to.
Parents in particular should be actively involved in their children’s education by staying informed about the curriculums being implemented in their schools. Participating in discussions and voicing concerns are essential towards ensuring our values and priorities are reflected in what is taught to our children. There should be a comprehensive review of education modules related to sexuality, to ensure they provide only essential health information that children need.
Demand changes to the current system by advocating for education that promotes healthy decision making, respect and responsibility without undermining cultural and religious values. Engaging with policymakers to push for curriculum reforms that promote the health and well-being of children and adolescents will also help.
Conclusion
CSE and SRHR are not entirely without merit. These programs have shed light on critical societal issues such as the dangers of Female Genital Mutilation, the harmful impact of child marriages and the need to promote equality between men and women. Not forgetting, the fierce fight against violence towards women and girls. These are positive aspects that promote empowerment especially in regions where these practices are still prevalent.
However, concerns arise when these programs cross a line and start teaching young children about contraceptives and sexual pleasure. The topics, presented prematurely are bound to undermine a child’s emotional development and understanding of healthy relationships. Many of the ideologies under CSE are culturally and religiously insensitive. They fail to take into account the deep-rooted beliefs held by the communities they are being introduced into. Children are special and should be treated with care. The youth on the other hand, should be encouraged to embrace marriage and family life, where sexuality is valued and respected in its rightful context. By approaching this topic with a balanced and critical perspective, we can work towards an education system that truly benefits the next generation.
References
- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2018). International technical guidance on sexuality education: An evidence-informed approach. UNESCO.
- United Nations Population Fund. (2014). Operational guidance for comprehensive sexuality education: A focus on human rights and gender. UNFPA.
- Ministry of Health and Child Care, Zimbabwe, UNFPA, & Zimbabwe National Family Planning Council. (2018). Comprehensive sexuality education for out-of-school young people in Zimbabwe: Facilitator's manual. UNFPA.
- UNFPA. (2023). Delivering comprehensive sexuality education for out-of-school young people: Country case study - Malawi. UNFPA.
- UNAIDS & UNESCO. (2013). Young people today: Time to act now. Regional report on the status of sexual and reproductive health and HIV in adolescents and young people in Eastern and Southern Africa.
Sylvia Mesesi is CCI Policy Officer Africa