The parent trap

Anastasia De Waal, 23 August 2010

The one GCSE guaranteed not to get any results is in Parenting, writes Annaliese Briggs.

Labour MP for Birkenhead, Frank Field, wants to apply the kind of joined up thinking exercised in Labour’s Department for Children, Schools and Families to the secondary school curricula in an attempt to bandage up broken Britain.  Baby brain development in science, household budgeting in maths and a few good parenting examples in history would formally supplement existing guidance on offer to curious teens (currently a bit of reproduction in biology, a few STIs in PSHE and inevitably a couple of extra-curricular experimental house parties).   Culminating in a GCSE in Parenting, exemplary prospective parents will seemingly be encouraged to go forth and procreate; those who flunk their studies will be advised to pursue an alternative path, presumably towards the nearest sterilisation clinic.

Whilst the impetus behind Field’s recommendation is clear, the form is frankly bizarre. Nestled somewhere between the respiratory system on page 56 of ragged biology textbooks and homeostasis on page 59, there exists a void in pedagogic endeavour. ‘Naughty’ diagrams depicting visions of the unknown are indicative of the state of sex education; like intrigued sixteen year olds nationwide, we know it exists, we just don’t know what to do with it.  This GCSE in Parenting strikes me as a predominately preventative measure and should perhaps be rebranded as a qualification in postponing parenthood.  I imagine precautionary tales of potty-training, sleepless nights and a diminished social life are as effective as any Kitemarked contraceptive.   Furthermore, we can reasonably assume this subject will be popular amongst adolescent girls vying to play mum, further severing an already weak link between parenting and the role of the father.   No self-conscious, aftershave-daubed teen boy in his right mind would be seen dead clutching a fake baby at break-time.

Field’s proposal arises from a critique of real problems in current parenting; as such, some children are more susceptible to future bad practice than others.  If schools are to play a serious role in equipping children with means to raise their children ‘properly,’ these children will have to be identified and targeted appropriately.  Key Stage 4 curriculum advice is unlikely to read: ‘A GCSE in Parenting appealed to Rachel because she comes from a dysfunctional family.  Her ill-educated, unemployed mother relies on handouts from the state and Rachel is reluctant to follow suit.  Rachel is confident that she will be able to cope with the coursework component, provided she can find a quite space in her small family home, away from the noise of siblings playing videogames and rows between her mother and new boyfriend.’

Field’s determination to reinforce the relationship between reproduction, sexual health, families and parenting is a step in the right direction; but, projecting an idealised bygone Victorian era of chastity and austerity in the form of a Parenting GCSE onto today’s teens is not pragmatic.