Campaigners have lost a legal challenge against the teaching of young children about gender identity and sex in primary schools across Wales, with a High Court judge rejecting a judicial review.
Campaigners brought a judicial review against the Welsh government’s new relationships and sexuality education (RSE) curriculum.
The curriculum was launched in September and involves mandatory teaching of RSE to pupils from the age of 7.
The two-day legal challenge, which was heard in November at the Civil Justice Centre in Cardiff, was brought by campaign group Public Child Protection Wales, which says the new curriculum is inappropriate for primary-age children.
In a written judgment, Mrs Justice Steyn said: “In my judgment, for the reasons I have given, the case law and texts relied upon by the claimants do not support the existence of a fundamental common law right of excusal.
“I reject the contention that such a right exists.”
She added: “In my judgment, the content of the [Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) Code] and the guidance is consistent with the requirement to take care to ensure that RSE teaching is conveyed in an objective critical and pluralistic manner, and does not breach the prohibition on indoctrination.
“There is nothing in the code or the guidance that authorises or positively approves teaching that advocates or promotes any particular identity or sexual lifestyle over another, or that encourages children to self-identify in a particular way.”
School leaders welcome sex education ruling
Laura Doel, director of school leaders’ union NAHT Cymru, said: “We welcome the ruling by the judiciary today, which means that schools can continue to roll out RSE, in line with the published RSE code and guidance.
“NAHT Cymru firmly believes that RSE is vital to ensuring that young people have the knowledge and understanding to safely and successfully navigate life outside school.”
Ms Doel added: “Although we agree that this must be done in an age-appropriate way, we must not lose sight of what we are trying to achieve, which is to support our children and young people to engage with different beliefs and a diversity of views, so that they can develop their own understanding of, and respect for, themselves and others.
“This is vital for their life in modern Britain, and these subjects are too important for young people to miss.”
In written arguments, Paul Diamond, representing the claimants, had said the legal challenge centred on the “whole-school approach” of the new curriculum, which was not subject to any rights of parental excusal.
Mr Diamond said the claimants were five parents - four mothers and one father - with children ranging in age from 9 to teenagers. Some of the children attend state schools while others have been removed over concerns about the curriculum.
“All five claimants have moral and philosophical objections to the proposed curriculum and would wish to exercise rights of excusal on behalf of their children in relation to the provision of any such classes,” Mr Diamond said.
“The proposed teaching of relationships and sexuality education 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.
“Were it to be taught as a standalone class and subject to a right of excusal, there would clearly not be any possibility of indoctrination.”
He added: “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.”
Jonathan Moffett KC, representing the Welsh government, rejected the language used by the claimants.
“Such hyperbolic rhetoric, which has been a feature of the claimants’ case throughout, is unhelpful and serves only to obscure the fact that, properly understood, the claim raises conventional public law issues in relation to the principle of legality and the lawfulness of guidance, issues which do not require anything other than a conventional forensic approach on the part of the court,” he said.
Mr Moffett said the claimants had failed to identify “what allegedly unlawful teaching” the new curriculum would adopt, and had instead decided to “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 said.
Jeremy Miles, minister for education and Welsh language in the Welsh government, said in a statement: “I welcome the court’s decision, which found in favour of the Welsh ministers on all grounds.
“The court rejected the characterisation of the RSE curriculum by the claimants.”
Mr Miles added: “We have been clear that RSE is intended to keep children safe and to promote respect and healthy relationships.
“Now more than ever, our children need our help in protecting them from harmful content and people online.
“RSE should provide young people with confidence to say no to bullies, to call out harassment, and to understand that families come in all shapes and sizes.
“Parents can expect the teaching their children receive to be appropriate for their children’s age and maturity: this is a legal requirement.”
Vivienne Laing, from charity NSPCC Cymru/Wales, said: “We welcome the decision made in the judicial review, so that the rollout of mandatory teaching of relationships and sexuality education in Welsh schools can continue.
“Its inclusion in the new Curriculum for Wales ensures every child and young person has access to RSE that is relevant, sensitive and age-appropriate to their capacities and needs.
“This has lifelong benefits for children and young people by teaching them about healthy and positive relationships, empowering them to recognise abuse and learn about their rights to be kept safe and healthy.”
