Towards a virtue ethical approach to relationships and sex education

Heyes, Joshua M.

doi:10.1080/03057240.2018.1450232

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Debates about sexual consent can sometimes be profitably conducted within an overarching framework of respect, and I suspect the term is more intelligible to most teenagers than ‘mutuality’ and less likely than ‘care’ to be rejected by them. Indeed, other educators have argued that the notion of respect for persons is a valuable framework within which to consider liberal sex education (e.g., Heyes, 2019; Steutel & De Ruyter, 2011).…”

Section: What Might School Sex Educators Best Do?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consent, mutuality and respect for persons as standards for ethical sex and for sex education

Reiß

2022

Journal of Philosophy of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines Lamb, Gable & de Ruyter's critique of consent as the standard by which one can determine if a sexual encounter is ethical in their 'Mutuality in sexual relationships: a standard of ethical sex?' . Their examination of this issue is to be welcomed for a number of reasons, including growing criticism of 'consent' as the gold standard in medical and social science research ethics. The focus of this article is specifically on school sex education (principally, for 11-16-year-olds). Contrary to Lamb et al., I argue that it is difficult to maintain that 'The standard of mutuality should be taught in all schools and the government should indeed demand or support this, even with checks to see if children have learned this standard, at least in attitudes about sexual behavior' for three reasons. First, while there are good arguments in favour of school children being introduced to the ideal of mutuality, it seems too high a bar to require children to 'have learned'-a phrase that can be taken to mean to 'have come to accept' rather than merely to 'understand'-this; consent is a more appropriate requirement and is itself a sufficiently rich term that it merits analysis by students, aided by their teachers. Second, my judgement as a sex educator is that sex education is more effective when students are given the opportunity to explore what is good and what is right, rather than simply being told. Third, if we have to adopt aThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Section: What Might School Sex Educators Best Do?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consent, mutuality and respect for persons as standards for ethical sex and for sex education

Reiß

2022

Journal of Philosophy of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Aims and Purpose: Educational Goodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of course, not everyone will be convinced that we ought to accept a broadly liberal framework for education and, even amongst those who do, there is still considerable room for (reasonable) disagreement about the precise purposes of education, as well as how best to achieve them (for an example of this kind of dispute in the context of RSE, see Heyes, 2019;Steutel & Spiecker, 2004;Steutel & de Ruyter, 2011). Nevertheless, it does seem plausible to maintain that, however one thinks the educational goods highlighted by Brighouse et al ought to be balanced, most will agree that they are goods; that is to say, they will generally support the idea that such capacities will, to a greater or lesser extent, play a positive role in an individual's life and are, therefore, worthy of pursuit in the educational sphere.…”

Section: Aims and Purpose: Educational Goodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The problem with faith-based carve-outs: RSE policy, religion and educational goods

Wareham

2022

Journal of Philosophy of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In September 2020, relationships and sex education (RSE) became compulsory in all English secondary schools, and relationships education became compulsory in all English primary schools, marking a significant step forward in the fight to establish children's rights. Although the new RSE regime will help to ensure that many English schools provide pupils with a far more comprehensive RSE curriculum than ever before, the statutory guidance underpinning it includes a number of caveats that mean, although the subject is compulsory, not all children will receive the same content. Arguably, along with the right to withdraw (which is often exercised on religious grounds), the most insidious of these 'carve-outs' allows faith schools to teach RSE according to their 'distinctive religious character' .This exemption has been used to defend the use of religious RSE resources that critics maintain are misogynistic, homophobic and often draw heavily on pseudoscience, as well as to justify leaving certain topics (such as same-sex relationships or trans rights) out of classroom discussion altogether. Drawing on empirically informed normative case studies and recent reforms to the curriculum in Wales, I argue that faith-based carve-outs to RSE policy imperil children's access to a distinct package of educational goods. Using a recent framework for educational decision-making based on these goods developed by Brighouse et al. I go on to conclude that such policies are politically and morally unjustifiable (at least if one agrees that This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

“…Esta tarea debe empezar en el hogar (los padres son los primeros y más importantes educadores en este campo) y ser continuada en el colegio (por parte de docentes bien preparados y que utilicen metodologías pedagógicas adecuadas a la edad y al sexo de los menores) 40 . La educación sexual ha de ir mucho más allá de enseñar cómo funciona el sistema reproductor humano: qué implicaciones tiene el ejercicio de la sexualidad y el marco en el que se deben dar esas manifestaciones.…”

Section: El Sentido Antropológico-educativo De La Conducta Sexualunclassified

Vacuna del VPH: elementos conceptuales ginecol�gicos, �ticos y bio�ticos

Raad¹,

Gómez-Fajardo²,

Gamboa-Bernal³

2021

BUP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Con base en el más reciente metaanálisis sobre la eficacia y seguridad de la vacuna del virus del papiloma humano (VPH), se exploran sus vicisitudes en los campos ginecológico, ético y bioético. Se hace una revisión de la bibliografía sobre el tema. Como una de las justificaciones de la vacuna es la prevención del cáncer endocervical, se muestran y comentan alternativas viables para su detección y tratamiento precoz. Se analizan algunas limitaciones éticas que ha mostrado esta vacuna. Se concluye que hay necesidad de replantear el manejo de ciertas enfermedades con vacunas, de lograr una mayor transparencia en la industria farmacéutica, redimensionar la medicina basada en la evidencia y diseñar estrategias educativas que promuevan conductas que estén de acuerdo con la naturaleza de la sexualidad humana.

show abstract

Towards a virtue ethical approach to relationships and sex education

Cited by 11 publications

References 22 publications

Consent, mutuality and respect for persons as standards for ethical sex and for sex education

Consent, mutuality and respect for persons as standards for ethical sex and for sex education

The problem with faith-based carve-outs: RSE policy, religion and educational goods

Vacuna del VPH: elementos conceptuales ginecol�gicos, �ticos y bio�ticos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About