London Daily

Focus on the big picture.
Sunday, Jun 01, 2025

Sex education: Parents lose legal challenge against curriculum

Sex education: Parents lose legal challenge against curriculum

Parents have lost a legal challenge against the teaching of young children about gender identity and sex in primary schools across Wales.

Campaigners launched a judicial review in the High Court against the Welsh government's new relationships and sexuality education (RSE) curriculum.

It was launched in September and sees the mandatory teaching of these topics to pupils from the age of three.

The legal challenge was rejected but claimants plan to appeal.

It follows a two-day legal hearing in November at the Civil Justice Centre in Cardiff.

The claimants were five parents of children of school age living in Wales who objected on religious and or philosophical grounds to their children being taught the subjects.

Mrs Justice Steyn said: "Teaching should be neutral from a religious perspective, but it is not required to be value neutral."

It referenced sex education that aims to encourage "tolerance between human beings irrespective of their sexual orientation and identity" and enables children to deal critically with influences from society.

The policy is the statutory guidance for headteachers, governing bodies and local education authorities

The court found the introduction of mandatory RSE had been "the product of a process of careful consideration".

All five claimants have "moral and philosophical objections" to the curriculum and wanted to exercise rights of excusal on behalf of their children to the classes, said Paul Diamond representing them.

"The proposed teaching of RSE in Wales is specifically constructed to be value-laden since much of the teaching, particularly that regarding LGBTQ+, will concern not facts of a scientific nature but highly contentious theories relating to moral and behavioural choices made by individuals," he added.

"Were it to be taught as a stand-alone class and subject to a right of excusal, there would clearly not be any possibility of indoctrination.

"At stake in the present case is the question of whether there is any limit to what can be taught to children in schools or, ultimately, any place including the home and whether the state is to endorse the values of modern, liberal democracy or adopt instead a form of ideological totalitarianism."


'Hyperbolic rhetoric'


However, Jonathan Moffett, representing the Welsh government, rejected the language used by the claimants.

He described "such hyperbolic rhetoric" as "unhelpful", adding the claimants had failed to identify "what allegedly unlawful teaching" the new curriculum would adopt and instead "resort to broad assertions".

"The claimants have not pointed to any passages in the code or the guidance that authorise or positively approve teaching that advocates or promotes any particular identity or sexual lifestyle over another, or that encourage children to self-identify in a particular way," he added.

In the judgement, Mrs Justice Steyn said: "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."

Welcoming the judgment, education minister Jeremy Miles said he was "appalled by the misinformation that has been purposefully spread by some campaigners".

He added: "Parents can expect schools to engage with them about their plans for teaching RSE and to be able to raise any constructive questions or anxieties they have about those plans.

"We will work closely with schools and communities to ensure that they are heard and they are clear about what their children will and will not be taught."


'Dangerous woke agenda'


Kim Isherwood, one of the claimants and spokeswoman for the campaign, said: "We asked the High Court to recognise the overreach of power by the government, we asked the court to help us protect our children from future emotional, physical, and psychological harm.

"The evidence we provided to the court referenced and highlighted concerning levels of betrayal, deceit and false claims made by the government, but it appears as though the judge agrees with them - not only do we parents not have rights, but they were never there to begin with."

He added that the team plans to appeal the ruling to "fight harder to protect our children from a dangerous woke agenda gone off the rails".

Newsletter

Related Articles

0:00
0:00
Close
Hegseth Warns of Potential Chinese Military Action Against Taiwan
OPEC+ Agrees to Increase Oil Output for Third Consecutive Month
Jamie Dimon Warns U.S. Bond Market Faces Pressure from Rising Debt
Turkey Detains Istanbul Officials Amid Anti-Corruption Crackdown
Taylor Swift Gains Ownership of Her First Six Albums
Bangkok Ranked World's Top City for Remote Work in 2025
Satirical Sketch Sparks Political Spouse Feud in South Korea
Indonesia Quarry Collapse Leaves Multiple Dead and Missing
South Korean Election Video Pulled Amid Misogyny Outcry
Asian Economies Shift Away from US Dollar Amid Trade Tensions
Netflix Investigates Allegations of On-Set Mistreatment in K-Drama Production
US Defence Chief Reaffirms Strong Ties with Singapore Amid Regional Tensions
Vietnam Faces Strategic Dilemma Over China's Mekong River Projects
Malaysia's First AI Preacher Sparks Debate on Islamic Principles
White House Press Secretary Criticizes Harvard Funding, Advocates for Vocational Training
France to Implement Nationwide Smoking Ban in Outdoor Spaces Frequented by Children
Meta and Anduril Collaborate on AI-Driven Military Augmented Reality Systems
Russia's Fossil Fuel Revenues Approach €900 Billion Since Ukraine Invasion
U.S. Justice Department Reduces American Bar Association's Role in Judicial Nominations
U.S. Department of Energy Unveils 'Doudna' Supercomputer to Advance AI Research
U.S. SEC Dismisses Lawsuit Against Binance Amid Regulatory Shift
Alcohol Industry Faces Increased Scrutiny Amid Health Concerns
Italy Faces Population Decline Amid Youth Emigration
U.S. Goods Imports Plunge Nearly 20% Amid Tariff Disruptions
OpenAI Faces Competition from Cheaper AI Rivals
Foreign Tax Provision in U.S. Budget Bill Alarms Investors
Trump Accuses China of Violating Trade Agreement
Gerry Adams Wins Libel Case Against BBC
Russia Accuses Serbia of Supplying Arms to Ukraine
EU Central Bank Pushes to Replace US Dollar with Euro as World’s Main Currency
Chinese Woman Dies After Being Forced to Visit Bank Despite Critical Illness
President Trump Grants Full Pardons to Reality TV Stars Todd and Julie Chrisley
Texas Enacts App Store Accountability Act Mandating Age Verification
U.S. Health Secretary Ends Select COVID-19 Vaccine Recommendations
Vatican Calls for Sustainable Tourism in 2025 Message
Trump Warns Putin Is 'Playing with Fire' Amid Escalating Ukraine Conflict
India and Pakistan Engage Trump-Linked Lobbyists to Influence U.S. Policy
U.S. Halts New Student Visa Interviews Amid Enhanced Security Measures
Trump Administration Cancels $100 Million in Federal Contracts with Harvard
SpaceX Starship Test Flight Ends in Failure, Mars Mission Timeline Uncertain
King Charles Affirms Canadian Sovereignty Amid U.S. Statehood Pressure
Trump Threatens 25% Tariff on iPhones Amid Dispute with Apple CEO
Putin's Helicopter Reportedly Targeted by Ukrainian Drones
Liverpool Car Ramming Incident Leaves Multiple Injured
Australia Faces Immigration Debate Following Labor Party Victory
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Founder Warns Against Trusting Regime in Nuclear Talks
Macron Dismisses Viral Video of Wife's Gesture as Playful Banter
Cleveland Clinic Study Questions Effectiveness of Recent Flu Vaccine
Netanyahu Accuses Starmer of Siding with Hamas
Junior Doctors Threaten Strike Over 4% Pay Offer
×