Debate contribution: Relationships and Sexuality Education and Healthy Young Adult Relationships

Debate contribution by Mr Pat Sheehan on 14 January 2025.

MLA: Mr Pat Sheehan
Party at the time: Sinn Féin
Date: 14 January 2025
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Opposition Business
Heading: Relationships and Sexuality Education and Healthy Young Adult Relationships
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4736689

Text

Sinn Féin fully supports the need for a relationships and sexuality education curriculum that is age-appropriate, fact-based and delivered consistently across all schools. If we are serious about issues such as child safeguarding, supporting young people to have happy and healthy relationships, consent and tacking violence against women and girls, giving children access to proper RSE in schools is vital. I have sat on the Education Committee for a number of years. One thing that has come up time and time again is the inconsistency of provision and, often, lack of provision of RSE in schools. Young people themselves have told us that. Many tell us that they go through their entire educational journey without receiving education on that topic. While it is important to commend schools that deliver high-quality RSE to their pupils, the issue here is consistency — or, in this case, lack of consistency. Many schools are not grasping that it is an issue. Some are being led by external influences. That does not serve the needs of children and young people. Teachers need to be empowered, and they need the proper training and resources to teach RSE effectively. New legislation is welcome, but will it deliver what is required? I am not sure that it will. The topic needs to be underpinned by fact when it is taught to young people and to be delivered in a consistent manner across schools. There can be no equivocation in that. The need for proper RSE as part of the curriculum is clear. It is a child protection issue, and, according to the NSPCC:
"All school-age children and young people should receive whole-school comprehensive and inclusive RSE across all years. RSE can play a vital role in the safeguarding of children and young people. A whole-school comprehensive and inclusive approach to RSE has the potential to prevent harm to children by supporting children to recognise abuse and know how and where they can ask for help, understand consent and healthy relationships; and by enabling more adults to identify concerning behaviour and know what to do if a disclosure is made."
Such organisations are the experts, and they should be listened to. I have been clear in previous debates on education that the child should be central in policy development.
I have also said countless times that we need to be led by the evidence.

395 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.06 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.04	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.03	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.04	No
Controversy escalation	0.04	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.93	Yes
Overall judgement	0.06	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.99
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.01

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.91
No identity-related subject	0.04
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups	0.03
Education structures, integration and community division	0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:50 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification