Kristent Ressurssenter (KRS) hereby wishes to provide its input to the consultation on Representative Proposal 156 S (2023–2024). The proposal touches on several fundamental issues related to the school and school health services's handling of topics such as gender and gender identity, topics that have become increasingly relevant and debated in today's society.
As a resource center working with a Christian value foundation, we are concerned with decisions that affect children and young people, especially when it comes to complex and sensitive issues such as gender and identity. Our overarching concern is that current practices and guidelines do not sufficiently consider the potential long-term consequences of social transition among minors (changing names, pronouns and living as the opposite sex), and that current pedagogical approaches in schools may lead to a one-sided and unbalanced understanding of gender.
In this consultation, we will highlight three main points that we believe are crucial to ensuring that our children and young people receive the care, support and education they need to develop in a healthy and holistic way. We want to contribute to a constructive debate and decision-making process by highlighting the consequences of social transition, the need for balanced and academically sound education about gender, and the necessity of ensuring that the education system's courses and training offerings are rooted in scientific knowledge.
KRS supports the proposals calling for a revision of the national guidelines for health centers and school health services. We are deeply concerned that current practice, as described in the guidelines, does not take into account the risks that social transition among minors entails. Allowing minors to change their names and pronouns without thorough assessments can lead to irreversible consequences that children may regret later in life.
The current national guidelines in Norway encourage health centres and school health services to ask children how they would like to be addressed, and then adapt communication to the children's wishes. This is presented as a matter of course, without explaining the consequences this has for the child and the environment (parents, teachers and peers).
In contrast, the UK has adopted a more cautious approach to the social transition of minors. The UK guidelines, published by the Department for Education, make clear that social transition is not a neutral action, but rather an active intervention that can potentially have significant and lasting psychological effects on the child. The main rule in the UK guidelines is that children should not be socially transitioned, and that this should only be permitted in very special cases where a thorough assessment has been made beforehand.
For social transition to be considered, several factors must be carefully assessed, including the child’s age, parental consent, any clinical assessments, the duration and consistency of the child’s expressed wishes, and the impact on other students. It is emphasized that schools and health services must ensure that decisions are made with the child’s best interests in mind, and that hasty decisions are avoided.
Furthermore, the guideline points out that even if a school were to approve the use of a new name or pronouns for a child, there is no expectation that all teachers or students will necessarily have to use these. This is particularly true in cases where there may be a conflict with protected religious or other personal beliefs. Teachers and students who, for religious or other legitimate reasons, do not wish to use the new name or pronouns should not be forced to do so. In such cases, the school should seek alternative solutions, such as using the first name without the pronoun, in order to respect the rights and beliefs of all parties.
In light of this, we believe that Norwegian guidelines should be revised to include a similar cautious approach to that of the UK. This will ensure that decisions regarding social transition are made on a thorough and informed basis, with full parental involvement and consideration of all relevant stakeholders, and always with the best interests of the child in mind.
Proposal 2 in the representative proposal seeks to ensure that teaching in schools about gender and gender identity is academically sound and provides room for reflection. KRS supports the intention behind this, but we believe that the challenge lies largely in how the curriculum is interpreted and implemented in textbooks. The Value Alliance has written a detailed article on this topic, and here it is pointed out that the curriculum for primary and secondary schools only mentions the concept of “gender identity” once in a competency objective after the 4th grade of primary school. Here it says the following: «The student should be able to discuss similarities and differences between the sexes, about gender identity and about human reproduction». Here the concept is presented in a context that encourages reflection, not as a pre-defined truth. Nevertheless, certain actors, especially the FRI Association, have had significant influence on how this concept is presented in Norwegian school textbooks.
FRI, in collaboration with various publishers, has influenced the design of school textbooks, which has resulted in an excessive emphasis on concepts such as “gender diversity”, «born in the wrong body», “gender fluid” and “non-binary” – concepts that go far beyond what is specified in the curriculum. This has led to school textbooks presenting a one-sided understanding of gender that appears as scientific truths, without allowing for critical reflection or discussion. The result is teaching that does not necessarily support students’ ability to think critically, but rather delivers pre-defined ideas that everyone is expected to accept.
This is particularly concerning because there is no longer an approval system for school textbooks, which gives publishers great freedom to include content that does not align with the intentions of the curriculum. This has created an imbalance in the teaching of gender and gender identity, potentially exposing many students to a narrow and ideologically driven perspective.
KRS believes that greater emphasis should be placed on the correct interpretation and implementation of the curriculum, so that teaching about gender and gender identity remains balanced and reflective. It is important that teaching is based on science and that it promotes critical thinking, rather than presenting one-sided ideological narratives.
We support the proposal to replace the Rosa Kompetanse courses, which are currently used in schools and kindergartens, with courses developed by public institutions. KRS is deeply concerned about the influence that the Association FRI has had on the education system through its courses and teaching programs. The current Rosa Kompetanse courses promote an ideological approach to gender and gender identity that lacks solid scientific foundations and can lead to confusion and uncertainty among children.
Examples fromkindergartens shows how children as young as three years old have been told that they can choose which gender they want to be. This has led to cases where children begin to insist that they belong to a different gender without having the cognitive maturity to understand what this actually means. Such situations illustrate how ideologically driven teaching can influence children at a vulnerable age, without sufficient consideration for the child’s best interests or stage of development.
Furthermore, significant questions have been raised about the legitimacy of FRI's teaching methods. In several cases, FRI's approach to gender diversity and gender identity has been shown to fail to take into account the complex scientific realities surrounding these topics. Instead, it promotes a one-sided understanding of gender as fluid and optional, which contradicts biological science and can lead to confusion and concern among both children and parents. More and more now points out that FRI's influence in schools should be limited, precisely because their approximateg can help create more confusion than clarity in young people.
It is also worrying that FRI has gained such a large influence on teaching without an accreditation system for its courses. This has led to a situation where FRI can convey its ideological perspectives without necessarily being rooted in scientific knowledge or widely accepted pedagogical principles.
KRS believes it is crucial that the education provided to teachers and kindergarten staff is based on a scientifically based understanding of gender and gender identity, and that it is balanced so that it allows for different perspectives, including Christian values. We therefore support a replacement of the Rosa Kompetanse courses with courses developed by public institutions that can ensure that the education is academically sound, balanced and adapted to the children's developmental level.
Kristent Ressurssenter urges the Storting to adopt Representative Proposal 156 S. Through a revision of the guidelines for health centers and school health services, a correct interpretation and implementation of the curriculum, and a replacement of ideologically influenced courses such as Rosa Kompetanse, we can ensure that our children receive the care and education they deserve. It is important that the decisions that are made are based on thorough knowledge, responsibility and a respect for the Christian values that have been a cornerstone of Norwegian society.
On behalf of Kristent Ressurssenter
Marianne Brattgjerd
Academic Director, Health and Research
