Letter From Europe (About Compulsory Child Abuse)

European Parliament: extremist “sexual health and rights” report to promote compulsory child abuse

Posted on | October 18, 2013 

By J.C. von Krempach, J.D.

Turtle Bay and Beyond

Dear Friends, in a recent post we informed you about an “own-initiative-report” on “sexual and reproductive health and rights” that will be voted at next week’s plenary session at the European Parliament. We informed you of the dangerous content of this draft report, which seeks inter alia to turn abortion into a “human right”, subverts the freedom of conscience of medical practitioners, negates the role of parents as primary educators of their children, and the right of children to know their biological parents.

MEP Edite Estrela: does she know what she is proposing?

All this is of course not new. Indeed, when the radical gay-plus-abortion-lobby pulls all is forces together to set up a wish-list, the outcome is foreseeable, and no one should be surprised about it.

It is only upon a second, more careful, reading that I have discovered how insidious this report really is. It is actually much worse than I ever expected, and I must give the author of the draft, the Portuguese radical-left MEP Edite Estrela, the benefit of doubt: probably even she is not fully aware of what she is proposing. And if she isn’t, then the vast majority of the (predominantly socialist, communist, green and liberal) Members of the European Parliament who plan to vote for this report are not aware either.


But such lack of awareness is not an excuse. As a member of parliament, you are responsible for the votes you cast.

In the draft that will be debated and voted by the EP’s plenary assembly, mention is made of a “report of the World Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe and the German Federal Centre for Health Education (BZgA) entitled ‘Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe: A framework for policy makers, educational and health authorities and specialists’, published in 2010”, to which the European Parliament, according to the 11th indent of the draft resolution, “has regard”.

Obviously, this “having regard” means that those Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe should be complied with whenever there is question of sexuality education.  And there is quite a lot that Mrs. Estrela’s draft resolution has to say about sex education. We are not going to reproduce it in full length here – instead, we recommend paragraphs 41 – 56 of the draft to the particular attention of our readers.
Perhaps the most astonishing of those paragraphs is § 47, according which:

“(The European Parliament) calls on Member States to ensure compulsory, age-appropriate and gender-sensitive sexuality and relationship education, provided in a mixed-sex setting, for all children and adolescents (both in and out of school).”

Thus we must assume that Member States should, according to Mrs. Estrela’s draft, not only provide for compulsory sex-education at school, but they should also make sure that “all children” get such education also outside school. In other words, this is a statement on how parents should educate their children at home. And if the words in this draft report have the meaning they usually have, then we must assume that “compulsory” really means compulsory, and that “all children” includes children below school age. If Mrs. Estrela and her friends have their way, then all parents should be obliged to provide to their children sexual education that complies with the aforementioned Standards for Sexuality Education.

But what do these ‘Standards’ foresee?  Here is a short excerpt:

Children aged 0-4 should be informed about: “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body”, “early childhood masturbation”, “different family relationships”, “the right to explore gender identities”, “the right to explore nakedness and the body, to be curious”, etc. and they should develop “curiosity regarding own and others‘ bodies” and “a positive attitude towards different lifestyles”.

Children aged 4-6 should be informed about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body”, “early childhood masturbation”, “same-sex relationships”, “sexual feelings (closeness, enjoyment, excitement) as a part of all human feelings ”,“different kinds of (family) relationship”, “different concepts of a family”, and should develop “respect” for those different lifestyles and concepts.

Children aged 6-9 should go on learning about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body (masturbation/self-stimulation)”, but they also should be informed about “different methods of conception” and “the basic idea of contraception (it is possible to plan and decide about your family)”

Children aged 9-12 should be informed about “first sexual experience”, “orgasm”, “masturbation”, and should learn to “make a conscious decision to have sexual experiences or not” and “use condoms and contraceptives effectively”.

The standards differentiate between “minimum” and “optional” achievements, but masturbation at age 0-4 is mandatory. In short, this is a programme for sexual initiation beginning at toddler age, and one seriously has to ask oneself whether this kind of sexual education is not in fact a form of systematic and structured child abuse, albeit under a pretext of “education” or “skill development”.

There is a conspicuous absence of any genuinely moral attitudes towards sexuality that should be transmitted to the child: no reference to chastity, no reference to conjugal fidelity, only a vague sense that “everything is ok if it feels good, is consensual, and doesn’t entail an unwanted pregnancy. That attitude, however, appears to be compulsory in the sense that it would appear to be in violation of these “Standards” if parents attempted to transmit to their children any genuine (and in particular Christian) moral values related to sexuality.

Vicky Claeys, IPPF Regional Director for Europe. Is she the true author of the "Estrela Report"?

It is no coincidence, perhaps, that these Standards for Sexuality Education are cracking full of references to documents published by International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), and that indeed “sexual rights, as defined by IPPF” are referenced as compulsory knowledge for the age group 9-12.

A friend of mine, attending a meeting of the European Parliament’s Committee on Women’s Rights, from which this draft report has emanated, overheard IPPF Regional Director Vicky Claeys boasting that she was the true author of the draft, for which MEP Edite Estrela has only given her name. This would certainly explain some of the report’s otherwise inexplicable contents – but it would also raise the question whether Mrs. Estrela is actually aware that her report promotes paedophile child abuse in the guise of “sexual education”.

Somebody should ask Mrs. Estrela that question. I really hope somebody does…

… anyway, whoever in the EP raises his hand to vote for this draft is a supporter of child abuse. And the abuse in this case is not merely tolerated or condoned, but it is made compulsory, obliging parents to sexually abuse their own children.