[ad_1]
This day, and after a heated debate in the Chamber, the Chilean Chamber of Deputies finally did not give the green light to the Comprehensive Sexual Education bill.
The initiative was approved in general by 71 votes in favor, 65 against and 2 abstentions, however when the article was put to a vote – which contained provisions of the organic constitutional law – it did not reach the required quorum. He had 73 votes in favor, 67 against and 2 abstentions. “Archived”, decreed the vice president of the Chamber Francisco Undurraga (Evópoli) putting an end to the procedure.
The objective of the bill is the teaching of sexual education depending on the stage of the child, for example, in the case of pre-kindergarten through fourth grade, the focus revolves around the prevention of child sexual abuse, affectivity, self-care and self-knowledge.
Meanwhile, from fifth grade to fourth grade, biology and other socio-cultural aspects such as the prevention of adolescent pregnancy, contraceptive methods, respect for diversity and sexual orientation are addressed.
Intense discussion
The discussion was marked by intense interventions from both sides. While on Twitter the hashtags #ConMisHijosNoTeMetas, #ChileRechazaLaESI, versus #EducacionSexualIntegralYa or #ApueboEducaciónSexual, the parliamentarians deployed all kinds of arguments in favor and against the initiative.
Thus, in the instance, the deputy Cristóbal Urruticoechea (RN) He said that “this is a project that is nothing more than indoctrination in a gender ideology. Meanwhile, deputies Javier Hernández (UDI), Luis Pardo (RN) and Juan Manuel Fuenzalida (UDI), argued that the freedom of parents should be respected, since, according to them, parents are the ones who best know “the personality and maturity” of their children to educate them in relation to sexual education, since more than one of them will have “sensitivities in around these issues ”.
On the other hand, the MP RD Giorgio Jackson described as “impressive some medieval interventions on the comprehensive sexual education project.” “It seems that they forget that the main subjects of the right to education are children and adolescents,” said the parliamentarian on Twitter, while the deputy Natalia Castillo (RD)He pointed out that “sexuality should not be reduced to the sexual act (…) It is not a whim of progressivism, it is a concrete measure endorsed by international organizations on DD. H H”.
Along the same lines, the deputy Mario Venegas (DC) He profoundly demystified all those arguments that were viralized in the last day through social networks, which, according to the deputy, “demonized” the project based on falsehoods, for example, he clarified that the project does consider the importance of mothers and fathers and their participation in sex education, so they do not take their freedoms.
But from Evópoli, a party whose declaration of principles speaks out against all discrimination, the deputy Sebastian Alvarez He insisted that the project “imposes a unique vision of sexuality that must be incorporated into the programs of any educational project,” whether public or private. He also complained that the proposal is “in line with progressive ideas such as promoting respect for diversity and non-discrimination.” “This is an openly totalitarian proposal, this project is totally illiberal because it does not respect the freedom of parents or schools,” he insisted.
But the arguments were not the only controversy of the day. The session was also interrupted by a lengthy debate on the situation of the deputies Camila Vallejo (PC) and Urruticoechea (RN), who dialed in person in the room, but later withdrew and connected online. The president of the instance, deputy Francisco Undurraga, decreed that they were prevented from voting, which sparked a strong controversy over the regulations that operate in these cases. Even the dRepresentative René Saffirio (former DC) threatened with censorship of the table for “curtailing” the right to vote of parliamentarians “I am not passing any machine,” said the vice president of the Chamber in his defense, insisting that he only applied the same criteria that had been used with the telematic sessions.
Current sexuality education situation in Chile
The project that establishes General Bases for Affective and Sexual Education of boys, girls and adolescents, in educational establishments, and modifies legal norms that it indicates (Bulletin Nos. 11710-04, 12542-04, 12593-04 and 12955-04 consolidated) It comes to amend the lack of sex education in our country, a fact that brings countless problems and puts minors in our country at severe risk.
These problems go beyond adolescent pregnancy or the spread of sexually transmitted infections and / or HIV, since ignorance sustains violent, stereotyped, racist, homophobic, patriarchal and prejudicial relationships, according to the director of Aprofa, Débora Solís. In fact, 83% of young Chileans access information on sexuality through social networks, 71% of these children and adolescents do so through Internet pages, according to information from INJUV.
Currently, sexual violence against girls and boys in our country is alarming, and the generality of abuses occurs in an intra-family context, according to the report “Black figure of sexual violence against Girls, Boys and Adolescents: social concealment of a tragedy” , and this is one of the factors that has contributed most strongly to their impunity, so that only a smaller percentage of these situations are detected and reported to the courts (it is estimated that the figures of unreported cases fluctuate between 70 and 80 %).
In this way, the space that should be the most secure becomes the most dangerous for boys and girls. During 2016 in the country there was a rate of complaints for the crime of sexual violence against girls, boys and adolescents of 91.3 per 100,000 inhabitants. The highest rate is located in the Metropolitan Region (108.8), followed by the Tarapacá Region (102.8), and the Los Lagos Region (101.7) appears in third place. The regions that show the lowest rates are Atacama (42.1), Aysén (64.2) and Maule (64.3).
[ad_2]
