Sex in Health Education: Official Guidance for Schools in England, 1928–1977

Abstract

This article examines official policy discourses on sex within the health education curriculum of schools during the period 1928-77. The article begins with an account of the origins of sex education in schools, and of why, in the early twentieth century, its inclusion in the health education curriculum was problematical. In the main section, the article examines the content of consecutive editions of the government published "handbooks of health education", and of an important supplementary guidance pamphlet, published during the Second World War. It traces the gradual shifts over time in official discourses of "sex education", and in the sets of understandings about children, sexuality and the role of parents, for example, which underlay them. The shifts in official guidance discourses on sex within the health education curriculum of schools are explained through locating changes in their broader social and political contexts, especially the impact of the Second World War on sexual morality and the post-war emergence of youth as a significant social grouping. The article concludes by evaluating the handbooks as a source for the history of school-based health and sex education and by drawing attention to the wider historical and sociological significance of official discourses on sex education.

Seventy years of sex education in Health Education Journal: a critical review

“…As Pilcher (2004) has noted, government policy on school-based sex education became much more explicit at the beginning of the 1940s, and the arguments in favour of sex education in HEJ are consistent with the wider concerns surrounding the 'lowering of moral standards inevitable in war-time' (Ewing, 1944) which inspired this new focus on sex education.…”

“…These papers suggest that a 'no-nonsense' approach to sex education was seen as the best approach to adopt during the period (which is also noted by Reiss (2005) and Pilcher (2004) in their reviews of contemporaneous sex education policies), particularly as a means to ensure that girls and boys were prepared for their respective roles in the family. Notions of 'normal' and 'abnormal' sexual activity are also firmly established in these articles.…”

“…This provides a striking contrast to the self-restraint advocated by , and it is apparent that traditional notions of 'normal' sexuality are being challenged; Dalzell-Ward's (1965) stance on sex education seems to reflect the more liberationist spirit of the times (Richardson, 2000). However, it seems likely that much sex education continued along the lines of the more conservative, biological approach that had been established since the 1950s (Reiss, 2005), when the Central Council of Health Education was primarily concerned with controlling the sexual (im)morality of young people, rather than embracing changing attitudes towards sexuality (Pilcher, 2004). …”

“…The paper also describes the important role of teachers and youth leaders in ensuring that such 'abnormal developments' do not occur (Appelbe, 1955), reflecting the way in which male homosexuality and female prostitution were viewed as 'topics of official concern' at this time (Pilcher, 2004). and both recommend the use of film strips for sex education and Davies particularly suggests that film strips produced by Cyril Bibby could be used as part of an approach that would aim to challenge the myths and misconceptions surrounding sex.…”

‘Oh no, nothing, we didn’t learn anything’: sex education and the preparation of girls for motherhood,c.1930–1970

“…This depiction of sexuality as a potentially destructive force is an articulation of official concerns about the impact of conditions of war on the morality of the nation, which had led to the publication of the pamphlet in the first place. 61 Nonetheless the report did aim to advise teachers on how to provide sex education although it did not dictate specific aims or methods. It was suggested that the approach to sex education be guided by the age and understanding of the child.…”