Skip to main content

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORT article

Front. Psychol.
Sec. Educational Psychology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1391197

Parental opposition to comprehensive sexuality education in Australia: Associations with religiosity and school sector

Provisionally accepted
Jacqueline Hendriks Jacqueline Hendriks 1*Neil Francis Neil Francis 1Hanna Saltis Hanna Saltis 1Katrina Marson Katrina Marson 2Jenny Walsh Jenny Walsh 3Natasha Lawton Natasha Lawton 4Sharyn Burns Sharyn Burns 1
  • 1 Curtin University, Perth, Australia
  • 2 Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia
  • 3 The HUM Academy, Melbourne, Australia
  • 4 Talk Revolution Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Australia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Purpose: To empirically examine associations between parental opposition towards comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) and religiosity. Methods: A nationally representative survey of Australian parents (N=2,418) examined opposition towards 40 CSE topics, by parental religiosity and secular/religious school sector. Results: Whilst opposition to most CSE topics correlated positively with religiosity, even amongst very religious parents, disapproval was minimal (2.8%-31.2%; or 9.0%-+20.2% netted against non-religious parents). Parents with children enrolled in a Catholic school were less likely than secularschool parents to oppose CSE. Those with children at other-faith-schools were more likely to oppose CSE, but again disapproval was minimal (1.2%-21.9%; or 1.3%-9.4% netted against secular-school parents). Discussion: Only small minorities of very religious parents and parents with children in religious schools opposed the teaching of various CSE topics. Decision-makers should therefore be cautious about assuming that CSE delivery is not widely supported by particular families.

    Keywords: comprehensive sexuality education, Parent attitudes, Religion, Religiosity, School sector, Australia

    Received: 08 Apr 2024; Accepted: 18 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Hendriks, Francis, Saltis, Marson, Walsh, Lawton and Burns. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Jacqueline Hendriks, Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.