Public battles over what schools can teach about sex, identity and relationships, often framed around “parental rights,” have become more intense in recent years.

Behind the loud debate lies a quiet contradiction. Many parents who say sex education should be taught only at home don’t actually provide it there, either.

As a scholar of sex education, I found that parents strongly opposed to comprehensive sex education in schools were the least likely to discuss health-promoting concepts such as consent, contraception, gender identity and healthy relationships. I discuss similar themes in my book, “A Modern Approach to the Birds and the Bees.”

Comprehensive sex education delays sexual activity, increases contraceptive use and reduces teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection rates. It has a complex history, but has long received bipartisan support.

In recent years, however, old debates over sex education and funding have taken a sharper turn.

In June 2025, the Trump administration ordered California to remove gender-identity materials from sex education lessons or risk losing over US$12 million in federal funding.

This directive is part of a broader shift. Since the early 1980s, abstinence-focused policy has existed at the federal level under Reagan with the

© The Conversation