When I Was Young

Letter from Geraldine Wee

I refer to “Not until Aware regains trust: Education Minister” (May 22). I regret to hear Aware president Dana Lam’s remarks that the association feels the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) move to stop them from teaching sex education classes is “regrettable” and caused by “considerable pressure from parents”.

Perhaps what Ms Lam fails to see is that there were no complaints for two years not because parents agreed to what their syllabus taught, but because they were ill-informed and ignorant about what their kids were being exposed to. Sure, there may have been some good facts on sexually transmitted infections and HIV but that does not excuse the other areas which are against the norm of society and the parameters set by the Government.

I doubt that the MOE was pressured by parents to act; they acted based on the facts they were confronted with in the handbook.

I am relieved though, that the MOE has given very definite guidelines on what will be taught during such classes and that parents will be given handouts clearly stating what is being taught in class. It is not just students who need to be informed, parents too need to be educated on how to support and talk to their children about issues of sexuality.

Parents need to be more open and encouraging so that it does not get awkward for their kids to ask them about sex. Parents must play an active role in guiding their children — it is neither the MOE’s nor the school’s responsibility.

From TODAYOnline.com, Voices – Monday, 25-May-2009; see the source article here.

Ong Dai Lin and Alicia Wong, dailin@mediacorp.com.sg

-----

THE schools had found the workshops appropriate and did not get any negative feedback from pupils and parents.

But now, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has suspended the sex education programme by the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) after looking at its instructors' guide.

Sex education programmes by all other external vendors have also been suspended so they can be subjected to a more stringent vetting process.

The MOE has found a need for improvement in the "internal processes" for selecting and monitoring vendors to ensure they follow its framework for sexuality programmes.

Aware's Comprehensive Sexuality Education programme did not conform "in some aspects" to these guidelines, the MOE said in a letter to the media. In particular, parts of Aware's instructors' guide "convey messages which could promote homosexuality or suggest approval of pre-marital sex".

Aware president Dana Lam told Today she is "not surprised" by the MOE's decision. "It goes to reason MOE will have to do something (given the public interest in the programme). We're also open to seeing what has to be done," said Ms Lam.

As the women's group prepares to review and modify its instructor guide if needed, it will keep the CSE's key principle of informing young people to make choices according to the values of their upbringing, Ms Lam added. "We stand by the programme. After all, we've been running it for almost two years."

In a statement yesterday, Aware said, "Like all instructor guides, ours contains far more information than is used.

"The guide includes possible responses for instructors should certain topics, such as homosexuality and premarital sex, be raised during the sessions. They're not necessarily the responses actually used, as our instructors always use language and terms appropriate to their audience."

Ms Charlotte Wong, vice-president of the ousted Aware executive committee, told Today that MOE "is doing the right thing".

"Aware keeps shouting about providing choice and empowering the youth in decision-making in their sexual life ... On the other hand, CSE does not talk about abstinence; they steer clear from abstinence as choice," said Ms Wong on a personal note. Saying that she felt a "sense of calm" after hearing the news, she added that if the CSE sticks to MOE guidelines and caters to a majority of conservative parents, "we shall be all right".

For some parents, the suspension of the CSE programme is a welcome move. Ms Geraldine Wee, a mother of a seven-year-old boy, said: "It's good that people's views are respected ... Asian parents are generally conservative."

The 29-year-old scriptwriter said: "I was an unwed mother so it's even more important for me that my child has the right values and doesn't make the same mistake."

Soon, parents will know more about the sex education programmes in their child's school. The MOE is looking at ways to provide this information — which Ms Wee welcomed because "we should have a role to decide what the child is taught".

When contacted for further queries on its letter, a MOE spokesperson told Today it has received more than 100 emails and phone calls, "many providing similar feedback".

An online petition expressing concerns about Aware's CSE programme, and supposedly to be given to MOE, is also being circulated — with 7,000 signatories so far.

The debate caused by Aware's workshops for secondary schools has even generated argument about sexuality issues being raised in General Paper (GP) classes in junior colleges.

MOE is investigating materials used during these lessons that carry information on alternative lifestyles.

Pioneer Junior College principal Tan-Kek Lee Yong, for example, told Today the school had removed a presentation slide on family and culture, which showed two females kissing, after feedback from a parent.

Mrs Tan said the context of the slide was "sociological" and "clearly academic" with "factual information next to the picture".

She added: "Such materials, which students can easily retrieve (when they do research for GP), should be contextualized within societal norms for discussion so that students receive appropriate guidance."

-----

From TODAY, News – Thursday, 07-May-2009