Respectful Relationships Education (RRE) has the potential to play an important role in helping young people understand consent, boundaries, empathy, and mutual respect. When delivered responsibly, it can contribute to reducing bullying, harassment, and violence, and support healthier relationships throughout life.
However, recent events demonstrate that when “inclusivity” is prioritised without proper safeguarding, supervision, or age-appropriate boundaries, RRE can instead cause distress, confusion, and harm. The incident at Renmark High School in South Australia has become a case study in how these failures can occur—and why they demand serious scrutiny.
The Core Purpose of Respectful Relationships Education
RRE programs are intended to equip young people—typically adolescents—with skills to recognise abuse, understand consent, challenge harmful stereotypes, and develop emotional literacy. National frameworks such as Australia’s Resilience, Rights and Respectful Relationships initiative emphasise prevention of violence, not ideological instruction.
Evaluations by Our Watch and ANROWS consistently show that RRE is most effective when it is:
- age-appropriate,
- delivered by trained adults,
- supervised by schools,
- and focused on practical skills such as boundaries, empathy, and mutual respect.
Crucially, this evidence does not require graphic material, extreme examples, or unvetted external presentations. Teaching respect does not require shock value. When RRE strays from its preventative purpose, it risks undermining both student wellbeing and public trust.
When Inclusivity Overrides Safeguarding: The Renmark Case
On 22 March 2024, a presentation at Renmark High School, intended as a session on “respectful relationships” facilitated by Headspace Berri, devolved into an unsupervised hour-long talk for Year 9 girls (aged 13-15) that allegedly referenced bestiality and incest as part of LGBTQIA+ inclusivity. Students reported slides explaining the “+” in LGBTQIA+ to include such terms, with presenters laughing off explanations like “having sex with animals, but don’t Google it.” References to “sisterly love” and “brotherly love” were twisted to imply sibling incest, and images of post-gender reassignment surgery were shown—all without parental notification or a teacher present, according to reports by ABC news.
Several students reported feeling distressed and uncomfortable. Parents described their children as confused, upset, and unsettled in the days following the presentation. One family withdrew their children from the school and commenced legal proceedings against the South Australian Department for Education.
The Department later acknowledged the session was “unacceptable,” suspended the third-party provider, and introduced stricter vetting processes. Headspace also conceded that aspects of the presentation were inappropriate.
Importantly, LGBTQIA+ educators and advocates publicly criticised the session, noting that linking illegal or abusive acts to sexual identity was inaccurate and harmful. This was not a failure of “respectful relationships” as a concept—but of safeguarding, governance, and oversight.
Why This Matters: Inclusivity Without Boundaries Undermines RRE
Inclusive education can play a positive role in reducing bullying and social exclusion. Research indicates that supportive school environments can reduce harassment and improve wellbeing for all students.
However, inclusivity cannot come at the expense of safeguarding. When poorly implemented, it risks:
- exposing students to developmentally inappropriate material,
- shifting focus away from consent and respect,
- increasing anxiety and distress,
- and provoking backlash that undermines confidence in RRE altogether.
The Renmark incident illustrates how quickly trust can be lost when schools abandon core principles such as supervision, transparency, and parental engagement. Respectful relationships education should build confidence and safety, not introduce confusion or fear.
Early Exposure to Explicit Concepts: A Real Developmental Risk
A substantial body of psychological and public health research shows that early exposure to explicit sexual material—particularly when uncontextualised or unexpected—can be harmful to adolescents’ emotional and social development.
Studies associate associate early exposure with:
- increased anxiety and distress,
- distorted expectations of relationships,
- impaired understanding of consent,
- and higher vulnerability to coercion and exploitation.
While RRE is not intended to replicate explicit material, presentations that stray into graphic or extreme territory risk mimicking the same harms. Education should support healthy development, not accelerate exposure beyond what young people are equipped to process.
Conclusion: Safeguarding Must Come First
The Renmark incident is not an argument against Respectful Relationships Education itself. It is a warning about what happens when the pursuit of inclusivity overtakes basic safeguarding, supervision, and accountability. Programs designed to teach respect and consent lose their credibility when they expose young people to material that is developmentally inappropriate or delivered without transparency and care.
Respectful Relationships Education works best when it is grounded in evidence, delivered responsibly, and focused on helping young people understand boundaries, empathy, and mutual respect. These outcomes do not require shock, confrontation, or ideological messaging. They require trust—between schools, parents, and students—and that trust is easily broken when safeguarding is treated as secondary.
Women Speak Tasmania urges policymakers and education authorities to refocus RRE on its core purpose: protecting young people and supporting healthy development. Inclusivity and respect are not opposing goals, but inclusivity must never come at the expense of children’s wellbeing. Safeguarding must come first.