Notable Inclusions and Exclusions in the Final RSHE 2025 Guidance

Notable Inclusions and Exclusions in the Final RSHE 2025 Guidance

Comparing the draft and final 2025 guidance, there are some clear cases of content being added, removed, or refined in the final version:

Removal of Proposed Age Restrictions: Perhaps the most headline change is that the final guidance drops the explicit age limits that the draft had placed on certain “sensitive” topics. Under the draft, specific content (like detailed sexual content, pornography, gender identity, etc.) was delineated as only to be taught in secondary (and even then, possibly in later secondary years), with the guidance urging strict adherence to those limits. The final guidance excludes those hard age cut-offs. As noted, the new policy is that while content must still be age-appropriate, there is flexibility. This means the final document does not include the draft’s table or list of “do not teach X until Year Y” – giving schools more discretion. The rationale given by the DfE was that risks like exposure to harmful content are happening earlier in childhood, so schools shouldn’t be barred from addressing an issue earlier if needed for pupils’ safety. This is a significant shift from the draft’s more prescriptive approach.

New and Expanded Topics (Retained from Draft): The final guidance confirms a suite of new topics that were introduced in the draft, essentially not excluding any of the draft’s content additions. For example:

Online risks: Both versions include online safety education in much greater detail than before. This includes the concepts of “deepfakes” (manipulated images/videos) and “sextortion” (online sexual blackmail) being taught in secondary RSHE. These are entirely new inclusions in 2025 that were absent in the 2019 curriculum. The final guidance keeps these topics, underscoring that students need to know how to recognize deepfake pornography or attempts by predators to extort them, and understand the legal and personal consequences of such digital crimes.

Misogyny and Incels: The focus on combating misogyny is maintained. As detailed earlier, content about Incel culture, toxic online influencers, and male chauvinism is explicitly included. The final guidance did not exclude this contentious topic – rather, it amplified it by naming it directly. This signals that the education sector views misogynistic ideology as a serious risk to young people (especially young men) and wants schools to tackle it head-on. The fact that the final retained this draft inclusion shows a consensus on its importance.

Mental Health and Suicide: A notable inclusion carried into the final is guidance on suicide and self-harm prevention. Previously, schools were hesitant to broach suicide for fear of doing it improperly. The 2025 guidance includes age-appropriate teaching about suicide in secondary school, ensuring pupils know how to seek help for themselves or others. The final guidance kept the draft’s new content on this, and the DfE’s consultation response highlighted that planned content on suicide was retained despite its sensitive nature. It also includes teaching about bereavement and coping with loss, which was added in this revision

Personal Safety and Crime: The updated guidance (both draft and final) adds topics like illegal online behaviour, exploitation by gangs, and personal safety (including knife crime awareness). These were retained in the final. Students are now expected to learn strategies to avoid dangerous situations (like grooming or gang recruitment) and understand the importance of reporting concerns. For example, learning about “county lines” drug trafficking and hate crimes appears in the curriculum outline – these inclusions reflect broader government priorities and were not present in older RSHE guidance.

Physical Health Additions: On the health side, menstrual and reproductive health got new emphasis. The final guidance includes content on menstrual wellbeing and addresses myths or practices like “virginity testing,” as mentioned, and likely also discusses topics like IVF or adoption as routes to parenthood. None of these additions were removed; the final guidance states that additional content on things like menstrual & gynaecological health, and fertility have been retained from the draft’s proposals.

Exclusions or Omissions: Aside from the age-limit policy and the blanket exclusion of gender identity (both of which the final rolled back), there aren’t many areas where the final guidance left something out that the draft had included. One could say the draft’s tone of prohibition (on gender identity teaching, for instance) was excluded and replaced with a more balanced tone. The final also omits any wording that could be seen as politically biased. For instance, the draft’s stance on not teaching “gender as a spectrum” as fact is reframed in the final to a more general impartiality guideline. The final still cautions against endorsing particular contested views, but it doesn’t read as a political directive. Another subtle omission: the draft in some places might have included language around “preparing for adulthood outcomes” for SEND (referencing the SEND Code of Practice), which the final might have streamlined. However, those are minor editorial changes. Crucially, no new age-based exclusions of content were added in the final – e.g., the final does not introduce any topic that must not be taught; it only emphasizes appropriate timing and manner.

Therefore at Cre8tive we would say the final 2025 RSHE guidance closely mirrors the draft in terms of curricular scope – virtually all the new topics and expansions proposed made it through – but it diverges in how it frames and constrains those topics. The major differences lie in what was removed (the rigid age barriers and the outright ban on gender identity discussions) and the stronger framing around implementation (flexibility, training, transparency). By comparing the two, one sees a clear trend: the final guidance aims to be more permissive and empowering for schools (to use their judgement and address issues frankly) while also being more explicit in expectations (e.g. expecting transparency with parents, expecting inclusion of all groups, and expecting a proactive stance on modern challenges). The end result is a guidance that, compared to the draft, is more accommodating in “what” can be taught when, but more prescriptive in “how” it should be taught (safely, inclusively, and in partnership with parents). All these changes set the stage for schools to begin teaching the updated curriculum by September 2026, with a clear understanding of what was revised from the initial draft to the final published guidance