Debate contribution: Relationships and Sexuality Education and Healthy Young Adult Relationships
Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on .
- MLA
- Ms Claire Sugden
- Party at the time
- Independent
- 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 4736703
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I recall a meeting that I had as Minister of Justice a number of years ago. It was with a group of young people probably aged between 14 and 16. The conversations that we had about what was felt to be appropriate or, indeed, inappropriate stayed with me. It is shocking to know and understand what young people are thinking and are saying to one another. Eight years later, young people are still telling me troubling stories about life online, and we heard about the WhatsApp group in the previous debate, where hundreds of boys and young men say the most inappropriate things. There are figures on the influence of harmful figures on social media and on the deep hurt and fear that young women and girls are feeling. The world that our children are navigating today is very different from the world in which we all grew up. As a parent, I recognise my limitations. I do not fully understand the challenges that children and young people are experiencing today. I suggest that most of us in the Chamber do not understand those challenges.
I am self-aware enough to know that, 10 years from now, when my child becomes that age, I will know much less. I want my daughter and all young people, including boys and young men, to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to navigate, regrettably, one of the most dangerous regions in Europe for young girls and women. That is why RSE matters.
I appreciate that parents worry that RSE will overstep into their role. However, RSE is carefully designed to be age appropriate, and I fully expect that our current Minister of Education will ensure that. RSE for younger children is about kindness and boundaries, and for older children, it is about consent, respect and recognising abuse. It is not a displacement of parental or family rights; rather, it complements what we teach at home, providing young people with the tools that they need to thrive in relationships and society. It is important to note that babies do not come with a manual and perfect parents are not born the day their children are. Why do we assume that all parents do not need help in this area? Why do we assume that parents do not need to be guided in how to become parents? We do not do well, in Northern Ireland, in supporting our parents. We teach women how to give birth; I do not think we teach men or dads anything. I suggest that RSE is a way of complementing our parenting skills, not a way of interfering in them. Of course, we must deliver it well, which is why we propose a task force to ensure that teachers are trained. The Minister knows that teachers, parents and young people are asking for that. This is not about preventing harm but creating a culture of respect where consent is understood, harmful norms are challenged and everyone can thrive in a healthy relationship.
502 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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 (0.90).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.91).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.91 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.09 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.80 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.20 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 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.