But is itComprehensive? Unpacking the ‘comprehensive’ in comprehensive sexuality education

Abstract

Background: Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) is increasingly gaining traction within the international community. CSE is regarded as an important means of informing young people about their rights and sexual health, improving public health outcomes and contributing to sustainable development. Context and objective: Considerable variation exists in understandings regarding what makes sexuality education ‘comprehensive’. To gain greater clarity on what CSE is seen to be and entails, and how this form of sexuality education compares with other approaches, a review of existing programmatic and scholarly literatures was conducted. Design: This literature review analyses a range of CSE guidelines and academic sources engaging with the subject of CSE, and sexuality education more broadly. Method: Analysis of stated goals and means of CSE to identify core components of this form of education. Results: Four sets of core CSE components are identified, yet the analysis shows that the intended breadth of this type of sexuality education leaves considerable space for interpretation, with key concepts often remaining abstract. Furthermore, addressing the core elements of CSE and achieving its ‘emancipatory’ goals can work to exclude particular perspectives and subjectivities. Conclusion: The review draws attention to the politics of knowledge production at play in decisions concerning what is deemed ‘comprehensive’, for whom, when and where. It concludes that the notion of ‘comprehensive’ is a matter of degree, and that reaching consensus on a set of universal standards regarding what can be deemed as ‘comprehensive’ may neither be possible nor desirable. The analysis will be useful for those interested in more careful engagement with CSE and, specifically, in examining features that, in practice, may run counter to the original goals.

Classroom implementation of national sexuality education curricula in four low- and middle-income countries

“…Several definitions of CSE have been advanced in recent years (UNESCO 2018; UNFPA 2014), and there are varied understandings of what 'comprehensive' entails and how this approach differs from other types of sexuality education (Miedema, Le Mat, and Hague 2020). In this paper, we define CSE as education on relationships and sexual and reproductive health and rights that provides a structured opportunity for adolescents to gain knowledge, to explore their attitudes and values, and to practise the decision-making and other life skills necessary for making healthy informed choices about their sexual and reproductive lives.…”

Viewing Sexual Health Education through the Lens of Critical Pedagogy: A Case Study in Chicago Public Schools

“…Such an approach aligns strongly with what students and teachers in this study recommended and with the tenets of critical pedagogy. Rather than advocate for a different approach, others have advocated for adapting the definition of comprehensive SHE to be more inclusive of these topics and practices [57]. In either case, critical pedagogy provides a useful framework for understanding how to push SHE closer to what advocates, young people, and educators say is needed.…”

Sexual rights and sexual pleasure: Sustainable Development Goals and the omitted dimensions of the leave no one behind sexual health agenda

“…In contrast, comprehensive sexuality education that centres gender, power and rights can facilitate sexual empowerment and agency (Haberland & Rogow, 2015). While there is not a unified definition of comprehensive sexuality education, it is often conceptualized as including synergies between: sexual and reproductive health issues and practices; rights, participation and agency among youth; power and gender equality; and positive sexualities and respect in relationships (Miedema et al, 2020). It is debatable, however, how comprehensive 'comprehensive' sexuality education is, as 'sexuality educationwhat and how it is taughtis always a political project' (Miedema et al, 2020, p. 748).…”

“…It is debatable, however, how comprehensive 'comprehensive' sexuality education is, as 'sexuality educationwhat and how it is taughtis always a political project' (Miedema et al, 2020, p. 748). This is particularly true with regard to integrating sexual health and rights in comprehensive sexuality education that largely reinforces and normalizes heteronormative and cisnormative sexual scripts (Miedema et al, 2020).…”

“…Pleasure-focused and sexpositive sexual health education can produce increased and sustained safer sex practices (Ford et al, 2019;Singh et al, 2021). Yet the focus of sexual health research and education, particularly with LGBTQ persons and sex workers, has often focused on HIV risks rather than pleasure (Ford et al, 2019;Gruskin et al, 2019;Logie, Perez-Brumer, et al, 2021;Miedema et al, 2020;Parker, 2007;Singh et al, 2021). As sexual pleasure is a key motivation behind engaging in sexual practices and is also connected with well-being, it can be infused into high quality, sex-positive sexual health education and healthcare provider training and programs (Castellanos-Usigli & Braeken-van Schaik, 2019;Ford et al, 2019;Singh et al, 2021).…”