“The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable – (a) to his age, ability and aptitude, and (b) to any …additional learning needs (in the case of a child who is in the area of a local authority in Wales) he may have,
“To enable pupils and children to develop as ambitious, capable learners, ready to learn throughout their lives; To enable pupils and children to develop as enterprising, creative contributors, ready to play a full part in life and work; To enable pupils and children to develop as ethical, informed citizens of Wales and the world; To enable pupils and children to develop as healthy, confident individuals, ready to live fulfilling lives as valued members of society.”
“Expressive Arts Health and Well-being Humanities Languages, Literacy and Communication Mathematics and Numeracy
“…the following are mandatory elements – English Relationships and Sexuality Education Religion, Values and Ethics
“(1) The Welsh Ministers must issue a code (the “RSE Code”) setting out themes and matters to be encompassed by the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education. (2) A curriculum does not encompass the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education unless it accords with the provision in the RSE Code. (3) Teaching and learning does not encompass the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education unless it accords with the provision in the RSE Code. (4) For further provision about the RSE Code, see section 77.” (Emphasis added.)
“(1) The Welsh Ministers may issue guidance in relation to the exercise of functions conferred by or under this Act. (2) Before issuing guidance under this section, the Welsh Ministers must consult the persons they think appropriate (if any). (3) In exercising their functions, the following persons must have regard to any guidance issued by the Welsh Ministers under this section – (a) the head teacher of a maintained school … (b) the governing body of a maintained school … (g) a local authority in Wales.” (a) the head teacher of a maintained school … (b) the governing body of a maintained school … (g) a local authority in Wales.”
“(1) The head teacher of a school must design a curriculum for the school’s pupils. (2) That curriculum must comply with the requirements in sections 20 to 24, and any requirements imposed under section 25.” (Emphasis added.)
“20. The curriculum must enable pupils, or children to develop in the ways described in the four purposes. 21. The curriculum must provide for appropriate progression. 22. The curriculum must be suitable for pupils, or children, of differing ages, abilities and aptitudes. 23. The curriculum must be broad and balanced. 24. (1) The curriculum must make provision for teaching and learning that – (a) encompasses each of the areas of learning and experience, including the mandatory elements within the areas of learning and experience, and (b) develops the mandatory cross-curricular skills. (2) The provision for teaching and learning encompassing the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education must be developmentally appropriate for pupils, or children.
“(1) The head teacher of a school must ensure that the adopted curriculum is implemented for the school’s pupils in accordance with sections 28, 29 and 30. (2) The governing body of a school must exercise its functions with a view to ensuring that the adopted curriculum is implemented for the school’s pupils in accordance with sections 28, 29 and 30.”
“The adopted curriculum must be implemented in a way that – (a) enables each pupil to develop in the ways described in the four purposes, (b) secures teaching and learning that offers appropriate progression for each pupil, (c) is suitable for each pupil’s age, ability and aptitude, (d) takes account of each pupil’s additional learning needs (if any), and (e) secures broad and balanced teaching and learning for each pupil.” (Emphasis added.)
“(1) The adopted curriculum must be implemented in accordance with subsection (2) for pupils who have not yet completed the school year in which the majority of the pupils in their class attain the age of 14. (2) The adopted curriculum must be implemented in a way that secures teaching and learning for each pupil that – (a) encompasses the areas of learning and experience (including the mandatory elements within those areas), … (3) The teaching and learning secured under subsection (2) - (a) in respect of the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education, must be suitable for the pupil’s stage of development, …” (Emphasis added.)
“(2) The adopted curriculum must be implemented in a way that – (a) secures teaching and learning for each pupil that encompasses the mandatory elements within the areas of learning and experience, … (6) The teaching and learning secured under subsection (2) – (a) in respect of the mandatory element of Relationships and Sexuality Education, must be suitable for the pupil’s stage of development, …”
“(1) Regulations may enable the head teacher of a maintained school or maintained nursery school to determine, in cases or circumstances specified in the regulations – (a) that sections 27, 28, 29 and 30, or any of those sections, are to be disapplied in relation to a registered pupil at the school during the period specified in the determination, or (b) that sections 27, 28, 29 and 30, or any of those sections, are to be applied in relation to a registered pupil at the school, during the period specified in the determination, with the modifications specified in the determination. … (3) If regulations are made under this section, they must provide that a person may make a determination under the regulations only if satisfied that the curriculum that will be implemented for the pupil or child as a result of the determination will – (a) enable the pupil or child to develop in the ways described in the four purposes, (b) secure teaching and learning that offers appropriate progression for each pupil or child, (c) be suitable for the pupil or child’s age, ability and aptitude, (d) take account of the pupil’s or child’s additional learning needs (if any), and (e) secure broad and balanced teaching and learning for the pupil or child. (4) Regulations under this section may specify further conditions that must be met before a determination may be made under the regulations.” (Emphasis added.)
“The regulations must specify that the operative period of a determination made under the regulations is either – (a) a fixed period in the determination that does not exceed 6 months, or (b) a period that must be brought to an end (in accordance with the regulations) no later than 6 months from its beginning.” (Emphasis added.)
“(1) The curriculum for every maintained school in Wales shall comprise a basic curriculum which includes – … (b) a curriculum for all registered pupils at the school who have attained the age of three but are not over compulsory school age (known as “the National Curriculum for Wales”), … (c) in the case of a secondary school, provision for sex education for all registered pupils at the school, …” … (b) a curriculum for all registered pupils at the school who have attained the age of three but are not over compulsory school age (known as “the National Curriculum for Wales”), … (c) in the case of a secondary school, provision for sex education for all registered pupils at the school, …”
“Sex education in England: manner of provision (1) The governing body and head teacher of a school in England shall take such steps as are reasonably practicable to secure that where sex education is given to any registered pupils at a maintained school (whether or not as part of statutory relationships and sex education), it is given in such a manner as to encourage those pupils to have due regard to moral considerations and the value of family life. (1A) The Secretary of State must issue guidance designed to secure that when sex education is given to registered pupils at maintained schools in England – (a) they learn the nature of marriage and its importance for family life and the bringing up of children, and (b) they are protected from teaching and materials which are inappropriate having regard to the age and the religious and cultural background of the pupils concerned. (1ZB) In subsection (1A) the reference to sex education does not include sex education given as part of statutory relationships and sex education. …”
“Exemption from sex education in England (1) If the parent of any pupil in attendance at a maintained school in England requests that he may be wholly or partly excused from receiving sex education at the school, the pupil shall, except so far as such education is comprised in the National Curriculum, be so excused accordingly until the request is withdrawn. (2) In subsection (1) the reference to sex education does not include sex education provided at a maintained school in England as part of statutory relationships and sex education. (3) If the parent of any pupil in attendance at a maintained school in England requests that the pupil may be wholly or partly excused from sex education provided as part of statutory relationships and sex education, the pupil must be so excused until the request is withdraw, unless or to the extent that the head teacher considers that the pupil should not be so excused. (4) In this section “statutory relationships and sex education” means education required to be provided at a school in England undersection 80(1)(d) of the Education Act 2002 .”
“No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”
“At the time of signing the present (First) Protocol, I declare that, in view of certain provisions of the Education Acts in the United Kingdom, the principle affirmed in the second sentence of Article 2 is accepted by the United Kingdom only so far as it is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training, and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure.”
“1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. 2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”
“1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. 2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child. 3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”
“It is essential to respect the liberty of parents and, where applicable, of legal guardians, firstly to choose for their children institutions other than those maintained by the public authorities but conforming to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the competent authorities and, secondly, to ensure in a manner consistent with the procedures followed in the State for the application of its legislation, the religious and moral education of the children in conformity with their own convictions; and no person or group of persons should be compelled to receive religious instruction inconsistent with his or their conviction”. (2) Article 13.3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) provides: “The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.” (3) Article 18(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) (‘the ICCPR’) provides: “The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.” (4) In General Comment No.22: Article 18 (Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion) (1993), the Human Rights Committee expressed the view that: “…public education that includes instruction in a particular religion or belief is inconsistent with article 18.4 unless provision is made for non-discriminatory exemptions or alternatives that would accommodate the wishes of parents and guardians.” (5) Article 5(2) of the Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981) provides: “Every child shall enjoy the right to have access to education in the matter of religion or belief in accordance with the wishes of his parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, and shall not be compelled to receive teaching on religion or belief against the wishes of his parents or legal guardians, the best interests of the child being the guiding principle.” (6) Recommendation 1396 (1999) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on religion and democracy recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite the governments of the member states to “guarantee freedom of conscience and religious expression within the conditions set out in the European Convention on Human Rights for all citizens”, to “promote education about religions” and, in particular, to: “e. avoid – in the case of children – any conflict between the state-promoted education about religion and the religious faith of the families, in order to respect the free decision of the families in this very sensitive matter.” (7) In Resolution 1928 (2013) on safeguarding human rights in relation to religion and belief, and protecting religious communities from violence,the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe called on member States to: “9.11 while guaranteeing the fundamental right of children to education in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner, respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions; … 9.13. ensure the full respect ofArticle 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and relevant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and that the freedom of communities and individuals defined by religion or belief is respected and exercised within the limits of the law”. (8) In Resolution 1928 (2013) on the protection of the rights of parents and children belonging to religious minorities,the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe called on member States “to protect the rights of parents and children belonging to religious minorities by taking practical steps”, including to: “5.4. ensure easy-to-implement procedures for children or parents to obtain exemptions from compulsory State religious education programmes that are in conflict with their deeply held moral or religious beliefs; the options may include non-confessional teaching of religion, providing information on a plurality of religions and ethics programmes.”
“Healthy relationships education is the term used to describe the range of learning experiences and support that schools provide for pupils to develop safe, respectful personal relationships. This includes taking responsibility for their behaviour in their personal relationships and how to recognise inappropriate behaviour. … Main findings 1. The content and delivery of healthy relationships education vary too widely in schools across Wales. Overall, schools do not allocate enough time or importance to this aspect of personal and social education. 2. Schools that are most effective in delivering healthy relationships education create an ethos where pupils understand the importance of equality and respect the rights of others. In these schools, pupils build resilience and grow in self-esteem and confidence. 3. All of the schools surveyed as part of this report teach pupils about healthy digital relationships through e-safety education. As a result, pupils develop age appropriate awareness and understanding of important issues such as cyber-bullying, grooming and protecting personal information on-line. 4. Nearly all schools teach pupils about gender equality. … Too many schools, particularly in areas where communities are not diverse, do not recognise issues of violence against women as high priority. They do not prepare pupils well enough to live in a diverse society. 5. Evidence from Estyn inspections shows that nearly all Year 6 pupils in primary schools receive sex and relationships education (SRE). Increasingly primary schools are extending this provision into Year 5 to reflect the fact some children reach puberty at a younger age. … 7. Many schools make effective use of specialist agencies to deliver important aspects of healthy relationships education. Specialist agencies provide schools with a wide range of support including training for staff, age-appropriate lessons for pupils and signposting victims to sources of appropriate support. Where schools liaise effectively with specialist agencies, together they provide comprehensive coverage of healthy relationships education including age appropriate work on domestic abuse, violence against women and sexual violence. 8. In schools with the best practice, teachers supplement the input of health professionals and specialist agencies well to plan activities for pupils to explore important aspects of healthy relationships in lessons across the curriculum. … 12. There is support from all schools and agencies visited as part of the survey to include healthy relationships education as part of the health and wellbeing area of learning in the curriculum reform being planned following ‘Successful Futures’ (Donaldson, 2015).”
“Children learn about sexuality and relationships long before they start school. As soon as they enter the social world they will be interacting with complex and often contradictory messages about gender, sexuality and relationships from, for example, advertising, books, music, social media and television and from family members, peers and communities. Even very young children will be negotiating a range of social and cultural norms on these issues that will shape their day to day lives and imagined futures. This knowledge, often termed as the ‘hidden curriculum’ can include misconceptions and misinformation. It can also challenge and exceed adult expectations of what children and young people are learning and experiencing. Evidence based SRE programmes play a vital role in working with children, young people, parents/carers and communities; exploring the information and values about sexuality and relationships that children are already exposed to and often struggling to navigate for themselves. …”
“SRE is often too biological, too negative, and not enough focus is placed on rights, equity, emotions and relationships. There is a gap between children and young people’s lived experiences and the content of SRE There are not enough opportunities for children and young people to influence what they learn in SRE SRE is rarely inclusive and too heteronormative SRE is inadequate for children and young people with disabilities High quality SRE: starts early; is adaptable and needs-led; offers a spiral curriculum; collaborates with external providers; is of sufficient duration; is engaging and participatory; and creates a safe, respectful and confidential learning environment A whole school approach is the single most important element for high quality and effective SRE SRE as a curriculum is often poorly resourced, given low priority in schools, leading to uneven and unequal provision There is a lack of awareness and education on violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence (VAWDASV) Effective delivery of high quality SRE depends upon having a well-trained and confident workforce Successful take up of national SRE specialist training programmes will depend upon the programme being publicly funded and the subject having equal status to other curriculum areas.” (Emphasis added.)
“A whole school approach to SRE means that the core principles of informing the learning and experience from planned SRE sessions (in or outside the classroom) will be reinforced (and importantly, not undermined) across different areas of the school and community. In relation to prevention, protection and transformation, whole school approaches are not just more likely to result in sustained cultural changes at the level of the individual learner, but across school staff and governing bodies and the wider school community.”
“15. Parents are currently able to prevent their children from receiving aspects of sex education in school (i.e. aspects not contained in the national curriculum). As with RE, parents are not required to give a reason for withdrawal and this remains with the parent throughout schooling (including the sixth form). This consultation proposes there will be no parental right to withdraw from RSE (and RE). … 29. … Part of the rationale for including RE and RSE as mandatory elements in the new curriculum is the importance of their contribution to the four purposes; it is unlikely that some of the key characteristics could be secured by learners without access to these subjects. 30 … in terms of RSE pupils have available to them a vast amount of information through the internet. That information can be accessed easily and in a number of different ways. We believe that the state has a moral obligation to ensure that children in schools receive neutral and accurate information in these issues which pervade throughout society. 31. Not including the right to withdraw would also support the interdisciplinary approach being adopted in the new curriculum. There is already anecdotal evidence that schools and parents find it difficult to identify those lessons from which their child should be withdrawn. This situation is likely to be exacerbated by the interdisciplinary nature of the new curriculum, and it would be difficult to ensure that any right to withdraw was capable of being meaningfully exercised.” (Emphasis added.)
“The parental rights in the second sentence of Article 2 of Protocol 1 will be appropriately respected if the RE and RSE provided does not involve indoctrination and is provided in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner. The rights of the learner in Article 9 will be appropriately respected by ensuring they do not miss out on vital curriculum content – content which is important not just in terms of making progress in relation to the four purposes but also in safeguarding them. Their parents and wider community are free to provide education on RE (or Religions and Worldviews as we are proposing it is renamed) and RSE as they see fit outside of school.”
“Following consultation there is no intention to retain existing provisions to allow parents or those with parental responsibility to remove learners from religious education (to be renamed Religion Values and Ethics) and sex education (to be renamed Relationships and Sexuality Education). The intention of the Bill is to enable all learners equal opportunity to receive a broad and balanced education that will support them in developing in the way described by the four purposes.”
“420. As a Committee we are unanimous in our support for the inclusion of RSE as a mandatory element of the Bill. … 423. We are satisfied that not including a right to withdraw does not necessarily lead to a breach of parents’ rights under the ECHR, however it is essential that the design and delivery of RSE is objective, critical and pluralistic to ensure that parents’ rights are – and continue to be – respected. We recognise the vital role of parents in educating and providing guidance to their children and consider that RSE should complement this. 424. We believe that the mandatory nature of RSE is essential to creating the necessary conditions to enable our children and young people to access the high quality, comprehensive relationships and sexuality education befitting of a modern, tolerant and inclusive country. It is also an important mechanism to help children and young people to understand and respect both their own rights and those of others under the UNCRC and, more widely, the ECHR. 425. On this basis, we support the fact that the Bill does not include a right to withdraw as we believe all children should have full access to learning about relationships and sexuality. In our view, including even a limited right to withdraw risks undermining this approach. Nevertheless, we emphasise strongly that our support is predicated on the RSE designed and provided being: • developmentally appropriate; • objective, critical and pluralistic; • delivered in accordance with detailed and clear statutory guidance, constructed by experts, practitioners and children and young people themselves; and • underpinned by the necessary professional learning, resources and expert support.” (Emphasis added.)
“110. … the whole-school approach is concerned with ensuring that the teaching that pupils receive is reflected across the whole school community, and that the culture of the school allows pupils to seek non-judgemental support where necessary. This is likely to include, for example, ensuring that the school’s policies reflect the values that are taught in RSE and preclude discrimination on grounds of a person’s sex, sexuality or gender identity. 111. The whole-school approach is to be distinguished from the provision in the Guidance for RSE to be treated as a cross-cutting element of the curriculum. As the Guidance explains, RSE is ‘a broad, interdisciplinary and complex area that includes biological, social, psychological, spiritual, ethical and cultural dimensions’, and this means that RSE teaching can pick up on themes that emerge in other subject areas, and vice versa, in order to place them in context. … 112. For example, the guidance on designing a languages, literacy and communication curriculum points out that considering RSE themes in literature can help learners to start to think critically about how relationships, gender, sexual identity and body norms play out in different cultures and communities. Similarly, the guidance on humanities emphasises that this area of learning provides an important opportunity for learners to understand how societal understandings and perceptions of relationships, sex, gender and sexuality have changed over time across different cultures and contexts around the world, and how they continue to evolve.”
“Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) is part of a Global Roll out of Sexuality Education which is not appropriate for this country. It sexualises children, fails to safeguard, read’s [sic] like models of offending, has barriers to disclosure, and the local authority departments involved lack adequate training to spot the signs of Child Sexual Abuse, Exploitation, Harmful Sexual Behaviour, And much, more! In addition to that we have evidence those involved in the Welsh Curriculum lack knowledge of this global roll out.”
“The ‘TQ+’ elements of LGBTQ+ are of particular concern and are controversial political subjects. Transgenderism is a subject without ‘reason’ and I do not believe that a man can become a woman and vice versa. A school teaches a subject without any evidential basis. I believe it is an ideology contrary to the interests of woman and undermines important societal gains. Nor do I accept the notion of fluidity of gender identities. The meaning of queer/questioning is directed to questioning if you are queer and exploring such matters. This has no business in a school and is contrary to my belief that these are private family matters and that children are too young to be exposed to such ‘teachings’. The concept of ‘+’ is clearly purely ideological and is entirely divorced from any scientific criteria, it is being promoted by certain groups to further their own unscientific agenda to promote the existence of new sexualities. I am fighting against the sexualization of children which is opposed to my ethical and philosophical beliefs regarding the correct way to bring up children. … Issues of sex and sexuality are complex issues which engage many viewpoints and raise matters of deep ethical concern. Adults find this subject conflicting and it is not for the Government to promote one side of this complex debate: namely its view of what constitutes a morally good choice with which other people, such as myself, don’t agree.”
“I do not regard this teaching as teaching as it does not prepare pupils for the working world but seeks to indoctrinate/influence my son with views that I do not approve of. I have a moral objection to such teaching on such subjects: these intimate matters are for the parents to teach about or guide their children on. I regard RSE as sexually expressive, promoting values that I do not want taught to my children. … The Welsh Government has cleverly refused to detail the content or activist groups that they will use, but it is clear that there is an agenda. I would not want my son to go to school without a right of excusal from certain classes, nor be subject to this promotion in a whole school approach.”
“This curriculum teaches adult concepts when a children’s neuro development is such that they are not able to understand … and neither should they have the need to know such things. I believe it destroys their identity and confuses them, their gender, creating unresolved guilt and self-hatred. As a Christian I believe that our gender is decided before birth. Should God create a male that feels like he should be female it infers that God made a mistake. I believe that God is perfect even though sometimes we don’t understand everything that happens to us. … I do not believe that children should have adult themes of sexuality imposed on them; including the LGBTQ+ agenda in school. Normalisation of relationships occurs naturally throughout society; but this is the imposition of a morality (I disagree with) being imposed on my children.”
“(Rhywedd) often used to refer to whether someone identifies as female, male or non-binary. Gender can also refer to the social and cultural norms and differences that different societies have about how people behave, look or dress. People often find an important sense of identity in these but they can also perpetuate discrimination, inequalities and harms. LGBTQ+: “(LHDTC+) lesbian, gay, bisexual / bi, transgender / trans, queer or questioning. The + refers to other letters that can be added to represent other identities, including non-binary. Relationships: “(Cydberthnasau) can be interpersonal and intrapersonal. Interpersonal relationships refer to the connections and interactions between two or more people. Intrapersonal relationships refers to the relationship that one has with oneself. Both types are inextricably linked, shifting and changing over time. They can be familial, spiritual, romantic, platonic and sexual.”
“(Rhyw) attributed to a person on the basis of primary sex characteristics (genitalia) and reproductive functions.”
“(Rhywioldeb) a central aspect of being human and encompasses sexual orientation, gender identities and roles, sex, reproduction and intimacy. Sexuality is experienced and expressed through thoughts, beliefs, behaviours and relationships.”
“Pluralistic requirement Mandatory In all schools and settings, RSE must be objective, critical and pluralistic as to its content and manner of teaching (see the case of ‘Dojan and Others v Germany 2011 application no. 319/08’). By pluralistic we mean that where questions of values are concerned, schools and settings must provide a range of views on a given subject, commonly held within society. This also means providing a range of factual information on RSE issues. In all schools, where they explore specific beliefs or views, this must include a range of other faith and non-religious views on the issue. For example, schools may include learning about current tensions, disagreements or debates within society, or they may explore different perspectives within faiths on issues. Developing this pluralism is important in ensuring learners develop as informed citizens who are aware of and sensitive to a range of different opinions, values and beliefs. This supports them to engage with and navigate potential tensions. A good understanding of learners’ views, emerging values and backgrounds is central to developing this pluralism. Positive relationships with wider communities can help to create a constructive context for exploring aspects and tensions in a sensitive way.”
‘It was never intended that a child attending the school might be withdrawn for this or that hour to attend a lesson thought by the parent to be more useful or possibly in the long run more remunerative. The time-table and discipline of a school could be reduced to chaos if that were permissible.’
“It is conceded that by the law of this country the father is undoubtedly charged with the education of his children. The right of the father to the custody and control of his children is one of the most sacred of rights. No doubt, the law may take away from him this right or may interfere with his exercise of it, just as it may take away his life or his property or interfere with his liberty, but it must be for some sufficient cause known to the law. He may have forfeited such parental right by moral misconduct or by the profession of immoral or irreligious opinions deemed to unfit him to have the charge of any child at all; or he may have abdicated such right by a course of conduct which would make a resumption of his authority capricious and cruel towards the children. But, in the absence of some conduct by the father entailing such forfeiture or amounting to such abdication, the Court has never yet interfered with the father’s legal right. It is a legal right with, no doubt, a corresponding legal duty; but the breach of intended breach of that duty must be proved by legal evidence before that right can be rightfully interfered with.” (Emphasis added.)
“such guardianship embraces a ‘bundle of rights,’ or to be more exact, a ‘bundle of powers,’ … These include power to control education, the choice of religion, and the administration of the infant’s property. They include entitlement to veto the issue of a passport and to withhold consent to marriage. They include, also, both the personal power physically to control the infant until the years of discretion and the right … to apply to the courts to exercise the powers of the Crown as parens patriae.” (Emphasis added.)
“parental rights to control a child do not exist for the benefit of the parent. They exist for the benefit of the child and they are justified only in so far as they enable the parent to perform his duties towards the child, and towards other children in the family. If necessary, this proposition can be supported by reference to Blackstone Commentaries, 17th ed. (1830), vol.1, p.452, where he wrote ‘The power of parents over their children is derived from … their duty.’”
“We are not concerned in this appeal to catalogue all that is contained in what Sachs LJ has felicitously described as the ‘bundle of rights’ … which together constitute the rights of custody, care, and control. … A most illuminating discussion of parental right is to be found in Blackstone’s Commentaries, 17th ed. (1830), vol. 1, chs. 16 and 17. He analyses the duty of the parent as the ‘maintenance … protection, and … education’ of the child: p.446. … The two chapters provide a valuable insight into the principle and flexibility of the common law. The principle is that parental right or power of control of the person and property of his child exists primarily to enable the parent to discharge his duty of maintenance, protection and education until he reaches such an age as to be able to look after himself and make his own decisions.” (Emphasis added.)
“71. In the context of this legislation, the interests protected byArt 8 of the ECHR include both family life and privacy. The relationship between parent and child is an integral part of family life. … Family life also encompasses a broad range of parental rights and responsibilities with regard to the care and upbringing of minor children, enabling parents to take important decisions on their behalf, and Art 8 protects the rights of parents to exercise such parental authority (Nielsen v Denmark, para 61). 72. As is well known, it is proper to look to international instruments, such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) (‘UNCRC’), as aids to the interpretation of the ECHR. The preamble to the UNCRC states: ‘[T]he family, as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community.’ Many articles in the UNCRC acknowledge that it is the right and responsibility of parents to bring up their children. Thus Art 3(2) requires States Parties, in their actions to protect a child’s wellbeing, to take into account the rights and duties of his or her parents or other individuals legally responsible for him or her; Art 5 requires States Parties to respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, other family or community members or others legally responsible for the child to provide appropriate direction and guidance to the child in the exercise of his or her rights under the Convention; Art 14(2) makes similar provision in relation to the child’s right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; … Articles 27(3) and 18(2) make it clear that the state’s role is to assist the parents in carrying out their responsibilities… 73 This represents the detailed working out, for children, of the principle established in Art 16(3) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and Art 23(1) of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) that ‘[t]he family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State’. There is an inextricable link between the protection of the family and the protection of fundamental freedoms in liberal democracies. The noble concept in Art 1 of the Universal Declaration, that ‘[a]ll human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights’ is premised on difference. If we were all the same, we would not need to guarantee that individual differences should be respected. Justice Barak of the Supreme Court of Israel has put it like this (in El-Al Israel Airlines Ltd v Danielowitz, para 14): ‘The factual premise is that people are different from one another, “no person is completely identical to another” … Every person is a world in himself. Society is based on people who are different from one another. Only the worst dictatorships try to eradicate these differences.’ Individual differences are the product of the interplay between the individual person and his upbringing and environment. Different upbringings produce different people. The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get at the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world. Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way. As Justice McReynolds, delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States famously put it in Pierce v Society of Sisters (pp 534, 535): ‘The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.’” (Emphasis added.)
“the margin of appreciation is itself a principle of interpretation. When the European court finds that the contracting states should be permitted a margin of appreciation, it does not cede the function of interpreting the Convention to the contracting states, or enable their domestic courts to divide that function between their institutions. Contracting states can of course create rights going beyond those protected by the Convention, but that power exists independently of the Convention and the Human Rights Act, is not dependent on the margin of appreciation doctrine, and is exercisable in accordance with long-established constitutional principles, under which law-making is generally the function of the legislature.” (Emphasis added.)
“This is because there is too great a risk that the full implications of their unqualified meaning may have passed unnoticed in the democratic process. In the absence of express language or necessary implication to the contrary, the courts therefore presume that even the most general words were intended to be subject to the basic rights of the individual.”
“The principle of legality means not only that Parliament cannot itself override fundamental rights or the rule of law by general or ambiguous words, but also that it cannot confer on another body, by general or ambiguous words, the power to do so.”
“It is only if the guidance permits or encourages unlawful conduct in the provision of contraceptive services that it can be set aside as being the exercise of a statutory discretionary power in an unreasonable way.”
“63. … where the question is whether a policy is unlawful, that issue must be addressed looking at whether the policy can be operated in a lawful way or whether it imposes requirements which mean that it can be seen at the outset that a material and identifiable number of cases will be dealt with in an unlawful way. … 65. … In principle, the test for the lawfulness of a policy is not a statistical test but should depend, as the Gillick test does, on a comparison of the law and of what is stated to be the behaviour required if the policy is followed.”
“There is no Convention guarantee of compliance with domestic law.”
“Mr Gordon, on behalf of Mind, submits that the interference is not ‘in accordance with law’ because not prescribed by a binding general law. I cannot for my part accept this. The requirement that any interference with the right guaranteed by article 8(1) be in accordance with the law is important and salutary, but it is directed to substance and not form. It is intended to ensure that any interference is not random and arbitrary but governed by clear pre-existing rules, and that the circumstances and procedures adopted are predictable and foreseeable by those to whom they are applied. This could of course have been achieved by binding statutory provisions or binding ministerial regulations. But that was not the model Parliament adopted. It preferred to require the Secretary of State to give guidance and (in relation to seclusion) to call on hospitals to have clear written guidelines. … The rules are accessible, foreseeable and predictable. It cannot be said, in my opinion, that they are not in accordance with or prescribed by law.”
“(a) The two sentences of Art.2 of Protocol No.1 must be interpreted not only in the light of each other but also, in particular, of Arts 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention. (b) It is on to the fundamental right to education that is grafted the right of parents to respect for their religious and philosophical convictions, and the first sentence does not distinguish, any more than the second, between state and private teaching. The second sentence of Art.2 of Protocol No.1 aims in short at safeguarding the possibility of pluralism in education which possibility is essential for the preservation of the “democratic society” as conceived by the Convention. In view of the power of the modern State, it is above all through state teaching that this aim must be realised. (c) Article 2 of Protocol No.1 does not permit a distinction to be drawn between religious instruction and other subjects. It enjoins the State to respect parents’ convictions, be they religious or philosophical, throughout the entire state education programme. That duty is broad in its extent as it applies not only to the content of education and the manner of its provision but also to the performance of all the “functions” assumed by the State. The verb “respect” means more than “acknowledge” or “take into account”
“should be read in the light not only of the first sentence of the same article, but also in particular, ofart.9 of the Convention , which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom not to belong to a religion, and which imposes on contracting states a ‘duty of neutrality and impartiality’. In that connection, it should be pointed out that states have responsibility for ensuring, neutrally and impartially, the exercise of various religions, faiths and beliefs. Their role is to help maintain public order, religious harmony and tolerance in a democratic society, particularly between opposing groups. That concerns both relations between believers and non-believers and relations between the adherents of various religions, faiths and beliefs.” (Emphasis added.)
“Article 2 of Protocol No.1 does not permit a distinction to be drawn between religious instruction and other subjects. It enjoins the State to respect parents’ convictions, be they religious or philosophical, throughout the entire state education programme. That duty is broad in its extent as it applies not only to the content of education and the manner of its provision but also to the performance of all the ‘functions’ assumed by the State. The verb ‘respect’ means more than ‘acknowledge’ or ‘take into account’. In addition to a primarily negative undertaking, it implies some positive obligation on the part of the State. The word ‘convictions’, taken on its own, is not synonymous with the words ‘opinions’ and ‘ideas’. It denotes views that attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.”
“Examination of the legislation in dispute establishes in fact that it in no way amounts to an attempt at indoctrination aimed at advocating a specific kind of sexual behaviour. It does not make a point of exalting sex or inciting pupils to indulge precociously in practices that are dangerous for their stability, health or future or that many parents consider reprehensible. Further, it does not affect the right of parents to enlighten and advise their children, to exercise with regard to their children natural parental functions as educators, or to guide their children on a path in line the parents’ own religious or philosophical convictions.”
“In the instant case the Court notes that the sex education class in question was designed to provide pupils with objective and scientific information on the sex life of human beings, venereal diseases and Aids. The booklet tried to alert them to unwanted pregnancies, the risk of pregnancy at an increasingly young age, methods of contraception and sexually transmitted diseases. That was information of a general character which could be construed as of general interest and which did not in any way amount to an attempt at indoctrination aimed at advocating particular sexual behaviour.”
“In the present case, the Court notes that the German authorities and courts have carefully reasoned their decisions and mainly stressed the fact that not only the acquisition of knowledge, but also the integration into and first experience with society are important goals in primary school education. The German courts found that those objectives cannot be equally met by home education even if it allowed children to acquire the same standard of knowledge as provided for by primary school education. The Court considers this presumption as not being erroneous and as falling within the Contracting States’ margin of appreciation which they enjoy in setting up and interpreting rules for their education systems. The Federal Constitutional Court stressed the general interest of society to avoid the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions and the importance of integrating minorities into society. The Court regards this as being in accordance with its own case law on the importance of pluralism for democracy (see, mutatis mutandis, Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) v Turkey (2002) 35 E.H.R.R. 3 at [89]). Moreover, the German courts have pointed to the fact that the applicant parents were free to educate their children after school and at weekends. Therefore, the parent’s right to education in conformity with their religious convictions is not restricted in a disproportionate manner. The compulsory primary school attendance does not deprive the applicant parents of their right to “exercise with regard to their children natural parental functions as educators, or to guide their children on a path in line with the parents’ own religious or philosophical convictions” (see, mutatis mutandis, Kjeldsen, v Denmark, cited above, at [54]; Efstratiou v Greece (2006) 43 E.H.R.R. 24 at [32]).” (Emphasis added.)
“63 The Court finds that similar considerations apply in the case at hand, where the applicants do not seek a general exemption from compulsory schooling with a view to educating their children at home but rather request exemption from specific sex education classes or school events which they deem to conflict with their religious convictions. 64 The Court observes that the sex education classes at issue aimed at, as stated by the Paderborn District Court, the neutral transmission of knowledge regarding procreation, contraception, pregnancy and childbirth in accordance with the underlying legal provisions and the ensuing guidelines and the curriculum, which were based on current scientific and educational standards. The goal of the theatre workshop ‘My body is mine’ was to raise awareness of sexual violence and abuse of children with a view to its prevention. 65 The Court refers in this context to s.33 of the North Rhine-Westphalia Schools Act stipulating that the aim of sexual education is to provide pupils with knowledge of biological, ethical, social and cultural aspects of sexuality according to their age and maturity in order to enable them to develop their own moral views and an independent approach towards their own sexuality. Sexual education should encourage tolerance between human beings irrespective of their sexual orientation and identity. This objective is also reflected in the decisions of the German courts in the case at hand, which have found in their carefully reasoned decisions that sex education for the concerned age group was necessary with a view to enabling children to deal critically with influences from society instead of avoiding them and was aimed at educating responsible and emancipated citizens capable of participating in the democratic processes of a pluralistic society—in particular, with a view to integrating minorities and avoiding the formation of religiously or ideologically motivated ‘parallel societies’. 66 The Court finds that these objectives are consonant with the principles of pluralism and objectivity embodied in art.2 of Protocol No.1. … 68 The Court finds that the presumptions underlying the decisions of the domestic authorities and courts are not erroneous and fall within the contracting states’ margin of appreciation in setting up and interpreting rules for their education systems. It further notes that there is nothing to establish that the information or knowledge included in the curriculum and imparted within the scope of the said events was not conveyed in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner. In this respect the Court shares the view of the domestic courts, which concluded that there was no indication that the education provided had put into question the parents’ sexual education of their children based on their religious convictions or that the children had been influenced to approve of or reject specific sexual behaviour contrary to their parents’ religious and philosophical convictions. Neither did the school authorities manifest a preference for a particular religion or belief (Zengin at [59]) within the scope of the school activities at issue. The Court reiterates in this context that the Convention does not guarantee the right not to be confronted with opinions that are opposed to one’s own convictions (see Appel-Irrgang v Germany (45216/07) October 6, 2009). 69 Moreover, as also pointed out by the German courts, the applicant parents were free to educate their children after school and at weekends and thus their right to educate their children in conformity with their religious convictions was not restricted in a disproportionate manner.” (Emphasis added.)
“to promote the propensity and ability of pupils, regardless of their cultural, ethnic, religious or ideological background, to address, in a constructive manner, the fundamental cultural and ethical problems of individual life and social coexistence and different value systems and explanations of life. Pupils shall thus acquire the foundations for leading an autonomous and responsible life, and develop an ability to interact socially and an aptitude for intercultural dialogue and ethical discernment. To this end, knowledge shall be imparted of philosophy, religious and philosophical ethics, different cultures and ways of life, the main world religions and questions of lifestyle.”
“The Court particularly emphasises that the setting and planning of the curriculum fall in principle within the competence of the Contracting States, which must nonetheless ensure that information or knowledge included in the curriculum is conveyed in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner, enabling pupils to develop a critical mind with regard to religion in a calm atmosphere which is free of any misplaced proselytism. They are also forbidden to pursue an aim of indoctrination that might be considered as not respecting parents’ religious and philosophical convictions, as the parents are primarily responsible for the education and teaching of their children. That is the limit that must not be exceeded.”
“As regards the applicants’ claims that the ethics classes were contrary to their religious beliefs, the Court observes that neither the School Act nor the course outline indicated that the classes were designed to give one belief priority over another, or omit or challenge other beliefs, in particular the Christian faith. … As to the applicants’ submission that the ethics classes contained ideas or conceptions critical of or opposed to Christian beliefs, the Court considers that it is not possible to deduce from the Convention a right not to be exposed to convictions contrary to one’s own (see, mutatis mutandis, Konrad, cited above). The Court observes above all that the first applicant can continue to attend the Protestant religion classes provided on the school premises and that there is nothing to prevent her parents from enlightening and advising their daughter, playing their natural role as educators or guiding her in a direction compatible with their own religious convictions … In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that by introducing compulsory ethics classes the national authorities did not exceed the margin of appreciation conferred by Article 2 of Protocol No. 1.”