Week 3 Assignment 2

Parental confidence and preferences for communicating with their child about sexuality

Alina Morawskaa*, Anthony Walshb, Melanie Grabskib and Renee Fletchera

aParenting and Family Support Centre, School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia; bFamily Planning Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

(Received 1 April 2014; accepted 4 December 2014)

Parents play an essential role in the development of children’s sexuality, yet often feel uncomfortable and anxious about how best to communicate with their children about sexual matters. This study had three main aims: (1) to examine parental views and confidence in relation to communicating with their child about sexuality; (2) to explore predictors of parental self-efficacy in communicating with their child about sexuality; and (3) to assess parental preferences for programme content. Data were collected across Australia by means of an online survey. Parents in the study felt relatively knowledgeable and confident discussing sexuality topics with their child, although they noted that there were topics they would not feel comfortable talking about. The extent to which the parent felt knowledgeable and comfortable in educating their child about sexuality and their use of effective parenting strategies were significantly related to parental confidence. Finally, parents rated all potential parenting intervention topics as being useful, but the most relevant topics were those related to prevention of child sexual abuse and encouraging a positive sense of self and body image. The implications of these findings for intervention design and development and further research are discussed.

Keywords: parenting; discussing sexuality; communication; parenting confidence; Australia

Introduction

Sexuality and sexual development in children are at the forefront of attention in Australia

and in many other countries. Sexual development is a normal part of personality

development, self-concept, and social skills (Bundy and White 1990), and children of all

ages display behaviours that adults would describe as sexual (de Graaf and Rademakers

2006; Friedrich et al. 2000). There are increasing concerns about the sexualisation of

children in the media and increasing exposure to sexuality-related messages (Walker and

Milton 2006). In general, children and adolescents have limited knowledge of sexuality

and sexual development (Brilleslijper-Kater and Baartman 2000). Young people in

Australia are tending to engage in sexual intercourse earlier, and to have more sexual

partners (Smith et al. 2009). While reports of the use of contraception are generally high,

rates for condom use are significantly lower, leading to concerns about sexually

transmitted diseases (Smith et al. 2009). Teenage pregnancy rates in Australia (,16/1000) (ABS 2009) are lower than in countries such as the USA, but higher than in many

European countries. Furthermore, there are concerns about the rate of child sexual abuse:

while in 2008–2009, over 5500 Australian children (0–17 years) had experienced

q 2015 Taylor & Francis

*Corresponding author. Email: alina@psy.uq.edu.au

Sex Education, 2015

Vol. 15, No. 3, 235–248, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2014.996213

substantiated sexual abuse (Bromfield and Horsfall 2010), estimates in the literature range

from 1.4% to 36% of children being affected by sexual abuse (AIFS 2013).

The role of parents in education about sexuality

The quality of parenting children receive is critical to children developing into self-

sufficient, resourceful adults, impacting on every aspect of their development (Vimpani,

Patton, and Hayes 2002), including sexual socialisation (Jaccard, Dodge, and Dittus 2002).

Children in the USA commonly ask parents questions about sexuality (Martin and Torres

2014), and the vast majority of Dutch two and three year olds have asked their parents

questions about genital differences, birth, and pregnancy (Brilleslijper-Kater and

Baartman 2000). While differences may exist between countries and cultures in both

children’s and parents’ views, cross-cultural comparisons are rarely conducted. While

parents acknowledge the importance of their role in educating their children about

sexuality, few parents actually discuss and communicate about sexuality with their

children (Canada: Byers, Sears, and Weaver 2008; Australia, Canada, Mexico, USA:

Dilorio, Pluhar, and Belcher 2003; Australia: Downie 1998; USA: Geasler, Dannison, and

Edlund 1995). There are a number of reasons for this including: parents not feeling

confident and lacking knowledge about sexuality; embarrassment about discussing

sexuality; fear of giving their child ideas and destroying their innocence; lack of effective

communication skills; and discomfort with their own sexuality (Australia: Berne et al.

2000; Dilorio, Pluhar, and Belcher 2003; Downie 1998; USA: Jerman and Constantine

2010; UK: Walker 2004; Australia: Walsh, Parker, and Cushing 1999).

Despite parental fears that early communication about sexuality may lead to

problematic sexual behaviour and damage children’s innocence, there is considerable

evidence that in fact the opposite is true. The relationship and communication between

parent and child, parental monitoring, and involvement have in fact been linked to

reductions in risky sexual behaviours in adolescence (Huebner and Howell 2003;

Hutchinson et al. 2003; Li, Stanton, and Feigelman 2000) and delays in initiation of sexual

intercourse (Lehr et al. 2000).

Existing approaches to education about sexuality

In general, there has been limited attention to effective interventions for education about

sexuality of children (Walker and Milton 2006). The majority of programmes have been

school based; however, these tend to have variable and often modest impact (Li, Stanton,

and Feigelman 2000; Stout and Rivara 1989) and the approach within the Australian

education system is ad hoc (Downie 1998; Hutchinson et al. 2003). In Australia, there are

few programmes designed and evaluated for parents, despite parents’ desire to be involved

in educating their child about sexuality. Efforts focusing on enhancing parent–teen

communication have had limited short-term results, but modest impact on adolescent

behaviour (Kirby and Miller 2002); however, there is some evidence that behavioural

interventions for parents can be effective with parents of young children (Wurtele et al.

1991, 1992).

The existing literature on programmes for parents has a number of limitations

including: (1) the use of non-randomised trials (Klein et al. 2005), with only qualitative

outcomes (Blakey and Frankland 1996; DiIorio et al. 2006), and small samples (Bundy

and White 1990; Caron et al. 1993); (2) an almost exclusive reliance on self-report

measures (Davis and Gidycz 2000; Kees Martin and Christopher 1987); (3) a focus on

236 A. Morawska et al.

parents of adolescents rather than younger children (Huston, Martin, and Foulds 1990;

Kirby andMiller 2002; Mannison 1988); (4) an emphasis on child abuse prevention (Davis

and Gidycz 2000; Wurtele et al. 1991); and (5) a variety of other methodological

limitations (Davis and Gidycz 2000).

In light of this, there is a clear need for evidence-based programmes to assist parents in

communicating with their children about sexuality. Such programmes should ideally be

grounded in theoretical and empirical literature around parent–child communication

(Byers, Sears, and Weaver 2008; Dilorio, Pluhar, and Belcher 2003; Jaccard, Dodge, and

Dittus 2002; Pluhar, DiIorio, and McCarty 2008), empirical evidence relating to evidence-

based programmes and interventions and should take into account the parent voice and

perspective (Sanders and Kirby 2012). In order to develop such programmes, information

is needed about parental views relating to children’s sexuality, predictors of parental

behaviours and confidence in educating their child about sexuality, and parents’

preferences for intervention.

The present study had three main aims: (1) to examine parental views and confidence

in relation to communicating with their child about sexuality; (2) to explore predictors of

parental self-efficacy in communicating with their child about sexuality; and (3) to assess

parental preferences for programme content. The term self-efficacy is defined as ‘the

conviction that one can successfully execute the behaviour required to produce the

outcomes’ (Bandura 1977, 193), and specifically pertains to an individual’s belief that they

can successfully perform a given activity, as well as to the strength of that belief (Bandura

1997). Thus, self-efficacy beliefs are attached to specific domains of functioning such as

parenting (Bandura 2000). We hypothesised that parental self-efficacy in communicating

with their child about sexuality, would be predicted by their knowledge, comfort, and use

of positive parenting strategies in educating their child about sexuality, over and above the

impact of demographic factors, parental adjustment, and general parenting self-efficacy.

Method

Participants

Participants were 557 parents who self-selected to participate via a wide recruitment

campaign, with a mean age of 38.4 (SD ¼ 6.72), of children between the ages of 3 and 10 years. If the parent had more than one child within this age range, they were instructed to

complete the survey based on the youngest child.

Measures

Due to the paucity of validated questionnaires which focus on parenting in the context of

child sexual development, a questionnaire was newly developed for the purpose of this

study. We sought to examine both parenting practices and parental self-efficacy in relation

to educating children about sexuality. We reviewed the existing literature and based the

development of the questionnaire on the largely qualitative work which has been done in

this area to date (e.g., Berne et al. 2000; Pluhar, Jennings, and DiIorio 2006). Questions

were created on the areas of child sexual development that were typically targeted in

available parenting intervention research (e.g., Byers, Sears, and Weaver 2008; Jerman

and Constantine 2010), and based on questions used in previous studies on parental

knowledge and comfort with sex education (e.g., Byers, Sears, and Weaver 2008; Jerman

and Constantine 2010). The questionnaire was reviewed by five Australian sex education

professionals and their comments and suggestions were incorporated into the final version.

Sex Education 237

The first set of questions examined parents’ sex education knowledge and their own

sex education experiences. Four items rated the extent to which parents felt they had

sufficient knowledge: about child sexuality, to provide education about sexuality to their

children, and of the school curriculum and community resources. These questions had

adequate internal consistency (a ¼ 0.77). An additional two items examined parents’ comfort in discussing sexuality topics with their child and whether there were topics they

did not feel comfortable in discussing. We did not ask parents to specify what topics they

did not feel comfortable discussing. These six items were rated on a four-point Likert scale

ranging from 1 (not true of me at all) to 4 (true of me very much or most of the time).

Parents were also asked to list sources of information about sexuality, including where

they currently obtain information on child sexual development, and where parents

believed their child obtained such information.

The next set of questions looked at parenting strategies and information about child

sexual development, how parents typically communicate and teach their child about

sexuality, and how confident they felt engaging in these teaching techniques within the

past four weeks. Parents rated whether they engaged in 17 teaching strategies on a four-

point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not true of me at all) to 4 (true of me very much or most

of the time). They rated their self-efficacy in these teaching techniques on a scale of 1

(certain I can’t do it) to 10 (certain I can do it). Examples of questions in this section

included ‘listened to your child’s views on sexuality’ and ‘felt comfortable talking to your

child about sexuality’. These questions had a strong internal consistency for parenting

behaviour and self-efficacy (a ¼ 0.90 and 0.95, respectively). A mean score for all 17 items for parenting strategies was obtained. Parents also rated overall how confident,

comfortable, knowledgeable, and anxious they felt in responding to questions from their

child about sexuality using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5

(extremely). These questions had adequate internal consistency (a ¼ 0.78). A final set of questions asked parents about their views on educating children about

sexuality and what they would like to see included in a possible intervention to help

parents teach their children about sexuality. Questions in this area included asking parents

about how important they were in educating their child about sexuality, how important

they felt their child’s school was, and how important the media was. Parents rated the

perceived level of importance on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5

(extremely). These questions had adequate internal consistency (a ¼ 0.65). Finally, parents also rated the perceived usefulness of specific content to be included in a parenting

intervention to help parents in teaching their children about sexuality, on a five-point

Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all useful) to 5 (extremely useful). These questions had

excellent internal consistency (a ¼ 0.94). Parents also completed the Family Background Questionnaire (Sanders and Morawska

2010), assessing demographic information such as parental age, educational level, and

financial stress. In addition, parents were asked to rate their own adjustment and their

current relationship satisfaction. Questions from the Parenting Experience Survey (PES;

Turner, Sanders, and Markie-Dadds 2003) were used to measure parents’ experience in

their parenting role, how supported they feel by their partner, the level of parental

agreement over discipline, and parents’ level of happiness in their relationship with their

partner. The questions are rated on a five-point scale with varying anchors. The first five

questions assess participants’ parenting experience, in particular how stressful, rewarding,

demanding, fulfilling, and depressing parents found their parenting experience. Internal

consistency for these items in this study was adequate (a ¼ 0.73). Single parents were only asked the first five questions, which were unrelated to having a partner. Three

238 A. Morawska et al.

questions addressed relationship support, conflict and satisfaction, and the internal

consistency for these items was high (a ¼ 0.86). Finally, parents were also asked about the level of support as a parent in general, how confident they felt as a parent, and generally

how difficult the child’s behaviour had been during the past six weeks.

Procedure

Ethical clearance for the study was obtained in accordance with the ethical review

processes of the University of Queensland and the Australian National Health and Medical

Research Council guidelines. Parents were a self-selected group identified by emailing

information about the project to the majority of publicly listed schools, with an available

email address throughout Australia asking for an advertisement to be placed in the school

newsletter. Parents were also recruited via notices on parenting websites as well as through

family planning clinics. Parents could then choose to log on to the web address supplied or

contact the researchers if they had any questions or preferred a pen and paper version. The

web address and project information was also sent to a variety of national parenting

associations and online parenting forums. Parents accessed the survey on-line and were

presented with an information page about the study as well as a consent page. Questions

could be answered by clicking the appropriate button, selecting from a drop down menu,

or by typing words or numbers into an allocated box. Participants could exit the survey at

any time. Parents could also request pen and paper versions and a reply-paid envelope was

included, but almost all (99%) chose to do the survey online.

Results

Respondent characteristics

A total of 677 participants expressed interest in the survey by selecting the link and

opening the questionnaire. Thirty participants (4.43%) did not complete any questionnaire

items or provide demographic information, 12 participants (1.77%) completed fewer than

25% of the items, 48 (7.09%) participants did not provide any demographic data and so

were removed from the analysis, 22 participants (3.2%) did not indicate an age for their

child, and 8 participants (1.2%) indicated their child was more than 10 years old, resulting

in the final sample of 557. Missing data for most variables were below 5%; however,

possibly due to the layout of the questionnaire, the self-efficacy ratings items were missing

up to 17% of the data.

The majority of respondents were the child’s biological mother (N ¼ 514, 92.3%) with a majority of the remaining respondents being the child’s biological father (N ¼ 28, 5.0%). The majority of respondents had a university degree (N ¼ 354, 63.9%), with 19.7% (N ¼ 109) holding a trade or qualification or college certificate, and 16.43% (N ¼ 81) having only high school or less education. The rate of university education in this sample

is much higher than in the Australian population more generally (i.e., 25%; ABS 2013).

Most (N ¼ 393, 71.4%) respondents reported working full- or part-time, and 87.5% (N ¼ 461) reported their partner as working full- or part-time. Most respondents reported being able to meet essential expenses in the past 12 months (N ¼ 437, 79.3%), but 17.1% (N ¼ 94) of the sample reported not having enough money to purchase much of what they wanted in the past 12 months. Most of the respondents were married or cohabiting

(N ¼ 465, 83.6%) and most children were living in an original family household (N ¼ 425, 76.4%). The mean age of the target child was 7.33 years (SD ¼ 2.02), and there were 315 girls (56.7%) and 241 (43.3%) boys. The majority of children were identified

Sex Education 239

with a white ethnic group (N ¼ 446, 89.6%), with the remainder primarily reporting as being Asian (N ¼ 15, 3.0%) or Aboriginal Australian and Torres Strait Islander (N ¼ 8, 1.6%), which is consistent with the Australian population.

Overall, parents in this sample felt that parenting was a moderately to very positive

experience, M(SD) ¼ 3.51(0.61), and felt very confident as parents, M(SD) ¼ 4.16(0.72). In general, parents felt supported in their role as parents, M(SD) ¼ 3.51(0.99) and experienced only slight difficulties with their child’s behaviour, M(SD) ¼ 2.17(0.90). Parents in a couple relationship felt very supported by their partner in parenting, M

(SD) ¼ 4.46(1.51), agreed on methods of discipline, M(SD) ¼ 4.35(1.43) and were very happy in their couple relationship, M(SD) ¼ 7.79(3.04). For these items, scores could range from 1 to 5, expect for the couple relationship item which was rated on a

scale of 1 to 10.

Knowledge and sources of information

Parents felt knowledgeable about educating their child about sexuality, M(SD) ¼ 2.38 (0.69). However, they also indicated that they wished their parents had talked to them

more about sexuality, M(SD) ¼ 2.48(1.04) and that there were topics about sexuality that they would not be comfortable in discussing with their child,M(SD) ¼ 3.15(0.92). Scores on these items ranged from 1 to 4.

As shown in Table 1, the main source of information about sexuality for parents when

they were children was friends, although nearly half also indicated that their parent was a

source of information. As adults, the main source of information about sexuality for

parents is the Internet as well as health professionals. Finally, parents felt that their child’s

main sources of information about sexuality were friends and parents. Parents could also

Table 1. Sources of information about sexuality.

Source

When you were a child, what was your main source

of information about sexuality? N (%)

What is your main source of

information about sexuality now?

N (%)

Where do you get information about children’s

developing sexuality

from? N (%)

Where do your children get information about sexuality from? N (%)

Friend/s 357 (64.1) 205 (37.1) 207 (37.6) 479 (86.0) Parent/sa 254 (45.8) NA NA 409 (73.4) Media (e.g., radio, TV, newspaper)

162 (29.2) 198 (35.9) 123 (22.4) 346 (62.1)

Teacher or school staff

215 (38.8) 33 (6.0) 50 (9.1) 273 (49.0)

Internet 4 (0.7) 314 (56.9) 292 (53.1) 108 (19.4) Other 113 (20.4) 120 (21.7) 161 (29.3) 53 (9.5) Health professional (e.g., GP, nurse)

33 (5.9) 257 (46.1) 243 (44.2) 51 (9.2)

Brochures 70 (12.6) 149 (26.8) 156 (28.4) 46 (8.3) Partnerb NA 175 (31.7) 70 (12.7) NA Relative 48 (8.6) 38 (6.8) 38 (6.9) NA

Notes: a Given as an option for the questions ‘When you were a child, what was your main source of information about sexuality?’ and ‘Where do your children get information about sexuality from?’ bGiven as an option for the questions ‘What is your main source of information about sexuality now?’ and ‘Where do you get information about children’s developing sexuality from?’

240 A. Morawska et al.

describe other sources of information. Of the 113 parents who identified another source of

information, the main additional sources identified were books, magazines and reference

materials.

Parenting

In terms of what parents reported doing, they were most likely to avoid teasing their child

about sexuality, to monitor their child’s Internet and television use and to stay calm when

their child asked a question about sexuality (Table 2). Parents were least likely to give their

child brochures or other materials, access community resources and interestingly to read

books with their child. In terms of confidence, parents were also most confident in

avoiding teasing their child about sexuality, monitoring Internet and television use, and

using correct terminology, and least confident in starting up a conversation about sexuality

with their child, accessing resources, and giving their child resources. Overall, parents felt

very knowledgeable, confident, and comfortable, and slightly anxious in responding to

questions about sexuality posed by their child, M(SD) ¼ 3.80(0.79), 3.77(0.81), 3.73 (0.90), and 1.91(0.86) respectively. Questions were rated on a scale of 1 to 5.

Predictors of parenting self-efficacy

Parenting self-efficacy was based on parents’ response to the question, ‘Overall, how

confident do you feel in explaining answers to questions that are asked of you by your

child in regard to sexuality?’ We did not use the mean score of 17 items relating to self-

Table 2. Rank-ordered parenting strategies from most to least frequent.

Behaviour

Frequency M(SD)

Range 1–4

Confidence M(SD)

Range 1–10

Avoided teasing my child about sexuality 3.68 (0.79) 9.33 (1.40) Monitored my child’s Internet and television use 3.62 (0.74) 8.89 (1.72) Stayed calm when my child asked a question about sexuality 3.33 (0.94) 8.07 (2.07) Used correct terminology for genitalia 3.18 (1.06) 8.46 (2.20) Modelled a positive body image 3.14 (0.88) 7.79 (2.14) Felt comfortable in talking to my child about sexuality 3.10 (0.99) 7.76 (2.40) Responded to a question about a sexuality topic 3.05 (1.05) 7.67 (2.24) Listened to my child’s views on sexuality 3.05 (1.11) 8.29 (2.08) Expressed comfort with my own sexuality 2.85 (1.12) 7.66 (2.53) Encouraged my child to share their thoughts and feelings about sexuality

2.62 (1.15) 7.62 (2.45)

Encouraged my child to ask questions about sexuality 2.52 (1.13) 7.24 (2.53) Discussed sexuality education for my child with my partner or another caregiver

2.51 (1.21) 8.02 (2.42)

Used a current event or media story to start a conversation with my child about sexuality

2.15 (1.17) 7.28 (2.61)

Started up a conversation about sexuality with my child 1.95 (1.01) 6.68 (2.76) Read books with my child about sexuality 1.85 (1.14) 7.17 (2.88) Accessed community resources to help me learn about child sexuality

1.79 (1.09) 6.97 (2.92)

Gave brochures or other materials to my child to help them learn about their sexuality

1.67 (1.07) 6.96 (2.92)

Sex Education 241

efficacy for specific parenting strategies, due to the larger proportion of missing data for

these items (ranging from 8.1% to 17.2% compared to 1.8% for the single-item confidence

measure). In addition, the correlation between the single item and the mean of the 17 items

was high (r ¼ 0.69, p , 0.001), suggesting that responses to these were highly related. Hierarchical multiple regression was used to examine the relationship between

parental self-efficacy in addressing sexuality issues, and sexuality-specific parenting

(knowledge (single item); discomfort (single item); anxiety (single item); parenting

practices (mean of 17 strategies)), taking into account demographic variables (parent age,

child age, parent education, and finances), general adjustment (parent adjustment (mean of

5 items), parent support (1 item), and relationship satisfaction (1 item)), and general

parenting confidence (single item). Demographic characteristics (parent age, child age,

parent education, and finances) were entered at step 1, general parent adjustment and

general parenting confidence at step 2, and measures assessing sexuality-specific parenting

were entered at step 3. There was no significant relationship between parental self-efficacy

and the demographic variables entered at step 1 (R ¼ 0.121; F(4,474) ¼ 1.77, p ¼ .133). Table 3 provides the standardised regression coefficients (b), as well as their 95%

Table 3. Results of the hierarchical multiple regression predicting parent self-efficacy.

95% confidence interval for b

b Lower bound Upper bound t r sr2

Step 1 Parent age 0.05 20.05 0.15 1.00 0.07 ,0.01 Child age 20.02 20.11 0.08 20.30 20.01 ,0.01 Parent education 0.05 20.04 0.14 1.08 0.07 ,0.01 Able to pay essential expenses 20.08 20.17 0.01 21.67 20.10 0.01 Step 2 Parent age 0.04 20.06 0.13 0.80 0.07 ,0.01 Child age 20.01 20.11 0.08 20.30 20.01 ,0.01 Parent education 0.07 20.03 0.16 1.42 0.07 ,0.01 Able to pay essential expenses 20.04 20.14 0.05 20.89 20.10 ,0.01 Parent adjustment 0.02 0.08 0.12 0.40 0.15 ,0.01 Parent support 0.02 20.09 0.13 0.39 0.12 ,0.01 Relationship happiness 20.03 20.01 0.07 20.65 0.04 ,0.01 Parenting confidence 0.22 0.11 0.33 4.06** 0.24 0.03 Step 3 Parent age 0.03 20.02 0.08 1.20 0.07 ,0.01 Child age 20.03 20.08 0.03 20.97 20.01 ,0.01 Parent education 20.02 20.07 0.03 20.90 0.07 ,0.01 Able to pay essential expenses 0.01 20.06 0.05 20.18 20.10 ,0.01 Parent adjustment 0.02 20.04 0.08 0.71 0.15 ,0.01 Parent support 20.02 20.08 0.04 20.57 0.12 ,0.01 Relationship happiness 20.03 20.09 0.02 21.16 0.04 ,0.01 Parenting confidence 0.04 20.02 0.10 1.20 0.24 ,0.01 Knowledgeablea 0.45 0.39 0.51 15.77** 0.71 0.14 Comfortablea 0.49 0.42 0.55 14.85** 0.75 0.13 Anxiousa 0.03 20.03 0.08 0.97 0.34 ,0.01 Parentingb 0.07 0.02 0.13 2.54* 0.44 ,0.01

Notes: *p , 0.05; **p , 0.001. a ‘Overall, how do you feel in explaining answers to questions that are asked of you by your child in regard to sexuality?’ bMean of 17 items where parents rated how they typically communicate and teach their child about sexuality.

242 A. Morawska et al.

confidence intervals and tests of significance, zero-order and squared semi-partial

correlations for steps 1–3. Addition of general parent adjustment and confidence at step 2

significantly contributed to prediction, Fchange(4,470) ¼ 6.72, p , 0.001. Taken together, all of the variables accounted for 6.8% of the variance (Radj

2 ¼ 0.052) in parental self- efficacy, F(8,478) ¼ 4.29, p , 0.001. The only variable significantly related to parental self-efficacy in addressing sexuality issues was general parenting confidence, as indicated

by a significant t-value and confidence intervals which do not span zero. Addition of

sexuality-specific parenting variables at step 4 significantly contributed to prediction,

Fchange(4,466) ¼ 285.24, p , 0.001. Taken together, all of the variables accounted for 73.0% of the variance (Radj

2 ¼ 0.052) in parental self-efficacy, F(12,478) ¼ 104.86, p , 0.001. The variables significantly related to parental self-efficacy were the extent to which the parent felt knowledgeable and comfortable in educating their child about

sexuality and their use of effective parenting strategies, as indicated by significant t-values

and confidence intervals which do not span zero. Interestingly, parental anxiety about sex

education was not found to be negatively associated with parental self-efficacy.

Sex education

Overall, parents believed that they had an extremely important role in the education of

their child about sexuality, M(SD) ¼ 4.60(0.59), while schools and the media played a moderate role, M(SD) ¼ 3.47(0.97) and 2.99(1.27), respectively, with items scored on a 1–5 scale. In terms of topics parents thought it important to cover in an intervention, the

topics rated as most relevant were those related to prevention of child sexual abuse and

encouraging a positive sense of self and body image. However, as shown in Table 4,

Table 4. Rank-ordered usefulness of topics in a parenting programme.

Topic M(SD)

Range 1–5

Protecting children from sexual abuse 4.84 (0.53) Encouraging child self-acceptance and self-esteem 4.79 (0.57) Encouraging a positive body image 4.79 (0.55) What to do about and how to react to signs of sexual abuse 4.73 (0.59) Communicating effectively with children about sexuality 4.71 (0.55) Helping children to express emotions and feelings 4.69 (0.62) How to identify sexual abuse in a child 4.67 (0.69) Obtaining accurate information about child sexuality and education 4.67 (0.63) Discussing puberty with children 4.61 (0.66) Understanding parents’ roles as sexuality educators 4.56 (0.72) Learning about sexual development and behaviour across childhood 4.53 (0.73) Exploring barriers to communicating effectively with children about sexuality 4.52 (0.76) Learning about the influence of the media and the Internet on children’s sexuality 4.47 (0.82) Discussing parental standards for children’s sexual behaviour 4.47 (0.78) Understanding the human body, reproduction, pregnancy, and birth 4.42 (0.83) Talking about sexuality, sexual expression, sexual relationships 4.39 (0.85) Using appropriate terminology with children 4.36 (0.91) Parent’s attitudes and values about sexuality 4.35 (0.86) Responding to child sexual play 4.30 (0.91) Exploring gender roles and gender identity 4.21 (0.97) Responding to child masturbation 4.19 (1.00) Responding to child nudity 3.97 (1.10)

Sex Education 243

parents rated all topics highly, with only one item, ‘responding to child nudity’, rated as

less than four on the five-point scale.

Discussion

In this study, parents reported generally feeling knowledgeable about educating their child

about sexuality; however, they also indicated that they wished their own parents had talked

to them more about sexuality and that there were topics about sexuality that they would not

be comfortable in discussing with their child. This finding is interesting in the context of

studies showing that children actively engage their parents in conversation about sexuality

(e.g., Martin and Torres 2014), and consistent with Australian literature showing that

parents often do not communicate with their children about sexuality (Berne et al. 2000;

Dilorio, Pluhar, and Belcher 2003; Downie 1998; Walsh, Parker, and Cushing 1999).

Parents thought that as parents they were their children’s main source of information

about sexuality (along with peers), and their role was very important. It is interesting to

note that parents indicated that they were a more important source to their child, than their

own parents were to them about sex education. This may represent a shift in how parents

and children relate to children across generations, or may perhaps reflect wishful thinking

on the part of the parent (Beckett et al. 2010; Miller et al. 1998). Parents also reported that

their children were more likely to use the media and Internet than they were as children to

get sexuality information, reflecting a change in access to media and technology, and/or

the increased availability of sexuality information in the media. While confident in certain

areas of parenting, such as avoiding teasing their child about sexuality, and monitoring

their child’s Internet and television use, parents were least confident in starting up a

conversation about sexuality with their child, accessing resources, and giving their child

resources. Interestingly, they were less likely to read books with their child about sexuality

despite identifying this as an important way of accessing information. Consistent with our

hypothesis, the best predictors of parental self-efficacy in addressing sexuality issues were

(1) the extent to which the parent felt knowledgeable and comfortable in educating their

child about sexuality and (2) use of effective parenting strategies. Significantly, in this

study, parental demographics and broader measures of parenting and the family

environment did not contribute to prediction of parents’ self-efficacy. This finding is

important as it suggests that in helping parents to feel more confident in discussing

sexuality with their children, addressing parent knowledge as well as specific parenting

behaviours and skills may be important intervention components. While parent knowledge

and comfort have been previously identified as important in communication about

sexuality between parents and their children (e.g., Byers, Sears, and Weaver 2008; Jerman

and Constantine 2010), studies have neither examined this in child–parent communication

nor looked at the role of specific parenting behaviours in educating children about

sexuality.

Parents thought that all of the topics listed would be important to cover in an

intervention, and the most highly rated ones were those related to prevention of child

sexual abuse and encouraging a positive sense of self and body image. It is clearly

important to ensure that parenting interventions focus on topics that are salient and

relevant to parents, and intervention design should be informed by parents’ perspectives

(Sanders and Kirby 2012).

This study had a number of limitations, which need to be considered. First, while the

sample size was relatively large, parents were comparatively well educated and adjusted,

meaning that generalisation to other groups is limited. However, the data did not show any

244 A. Morawska et al.

effect of parent demographic characteristics on self-efficacy with education about

sexuality, suggesting that parenting interventions should be available to all parents

regardless of background. Similarly, while we made the questionnaire available in a pen

and paper version, most parents accessed the survey online. Australian data show that

households with children are very likely to have Internet access (Ewing and Thomas

2010); nevertheless, this did limit the potential reach of this survey to those who had

Internet access and were comfortable in using the Internet.

A further limitation relates to our reliance on self-report, and particularly the use of a

purpose-built questionnaire. While the measures we used appeared to demonstrate good

internal consistency, the results need to be interpreted with caution, particularly given the

potentially sensitive nature of the questions being asked. In particular, the design and

layout as well as the instructions for the self-efficacy items need to be considered given the

relatively large amount of missing data on these questions. This limitation reflects a

broader gap in this area in terms of measurement of parent skill, self-efficacy and

behaviour. While self-report measures need to be developed and refined, further research

should also investigate options for direct or analogue assessment of parent–child

communication and parenting skill in this area. The development of such assessment tools

is an essential element in evaluating programmes that aim to enhance parents’ skills and

confidence.

Findings from this study point to the importance of incorporating specific parenting

skills in addition to enhancing parental knowledge about children’s sexuality in

developing programmes for parents. While parents felt confident in responding to

initiations from the child, they felt less confident initiating and were not likely to initiate

conversations with the child. Thus programmes should include skills about the initiation of

conversations about sexuality, and address parental barriers and beliefs which may impede

their ability to initiate such conversations. This could include information about age-

appropriate topics, how to use both available resources, such as books and materials

available on the Internet, and daily events to engage children in education about sexuality,

and practice of specific communication skills. Importantly such programmes should focus

on ways to integrate education about sexuality into daily life rather than waiting to have a

big talk once children are older. Furthermore, programmes need to include elements on

keeping children safe and more general body image and self-esteem concerns to ensure

that the needs of parents for information about these issues are met.

Parents in our survey said that they thought it was important to educate their children

about sexuality and indicated that they felt confident in this area, yet did not seem to

initiate conversations with their child about sexuality. In addition, most parents indicated

that there were sexuality topics that they would not be comfortable in discussing with their

child. Unfortunately we did not ask parents about what those topics might be. This is an

area which should be explored in more depth, particularly using more qualitative

approaches to better understand parents’ difficulties. Parents may have lacked skills and

confidence relating to specific topics or issues. It is also possible that they felt some topics,

correctly or incorrectly, were not age-appropriate for their child and hence their

discomfort with certain issues. More in-depth understanding of parental barriers will

enable the development of specific strategies to assist parents in overcoming such

difficulties.

One additional area worth exploring in further research relates to the findings about

where parents and children get their information from. Parents told us that health

professionals are a key source of information for them as parents. Given this role, it would

be important to explore to what extent these professionals are adequately resourced and

Sex Education 245

supported in terms of providing this information and in what ways they would prefer to

access information and skills training in this area. Parents also told us that one of

children’s main sources of information was the media. However, US teenagers themselves

indicate that they use but do not necessarily trust the information received from the

Internet (Jones and Biddlecom 2011). While we can speculate that much of the

information from the media and the Internet is accessed by children and teenagers

incidentally rather than intentionally, it would be interesting for research to explore ways

of using the media as a tool to communicate such information to children effectively.

Conflict of interest

The Triple P – Positive Parenting Programme is owned by The University of Queensland.

The University through its main technology transfer company, UniQuest Pty Ltd, has

licensed Triple P International Pty Ltd to publish and disseminate the programme

worldwide. Royalties stemming from published Triple P resources are distributed in

accordance with the University’s intellectual property policy and flow to the Parenting and

Family Support Centre in the School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Behavioural

Sciences, and contributory authors. No author has any share or ownership in Triple P

International Pty Ltd. Alina Morawska is however an author of various Triple P resources.

Funding

This project was supported by funding from Family Planning Queensland.

References

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2009. Births, Australia, 2009. Canberra: ABS. ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2013. Education and Work, Australia, May 2013. Canberra:

ABS. AIFS (Australian Institute of Family Studies). 2013. “The Prevalence of Child Abuse and Neglect.”

http://www.aifs.gov.au/cfca/pubs/factsheets/a144254/index.html#a8 Bandura, A. 1977. “Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change.” Psychological

Review 84 (2): 191–215. Bandura, A. 1997. Self Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. Bandura, A. 2000. “Self-Efficacy: The Foundation of Agency.” In Control of Human Behavior,

Mental Processes, and Consciousness, edited by W. J. Perrig and A. Grob, 17–33. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Beckett, M. K., M. N. Elliott, S. Martino, D. E. Kanouse, R. Corona, D. J. Klein, and M. A. Schuster. 2010. “Timing of Parent and Child Communication about Sexuality Relative to Children’s Sexual Behaviors.” Pediatrics 125 (1): 34–42.

Berne, L. A., W. Patton, J. Milton, L. Y. A. Hunt, S. Wright, J. Peppard, and J. Dodd. 2000. “A Qualitative Assessment of Australian Parents’ Perceptions of Sexuality Education and Communication.” Journal of Sex Education & Therapy 25 (2–3): 161–168.

Blakey, V., and J. Frankland. 1996. “Sex Education for Parents.” Health Education 96 (5): 9–13. Brilleslijper-Kater, S. N., and H. E. M. Baartman. 2000. “What Do Young Children Know About

Sex? Research on the Sexual Knowledge of Children between the Ages of 2 and 6Years.” Child Abuse Review 9 (3): 166–182.

Bromfield, L., and B. Horsfall. 2010. “Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics.” National Child Protection Clearinghouse Resource Sheet. Canberra: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Bundy, M. L., and P. N. White. 1990. “Parents as Sexuality Educators: A Parent Training Program.” Journal of Counseling & Development 68 (3): 321–323.

Byers, E. S., H. A. Sears, and A. D. Weaver. 2008. “Parents’ Reports of Sexual Communication with Children in Kindergarten to Grade 8.” Journal of Marriage and Family 70 (1): 86–96.

246 A. Morawska et al.

Caron, S. L., C. B. Knox, C. Rhoades, J. Aho, K. K. Tulman, and M. Volock. 1993. “Sexuality Education in the Workplace: Seminars for Parents.” Journal of Sex Education & Therapy 19 (3): 200–211.

Davis, M. K., and C. A. Gidycz. 2000. “Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Programs: A Meta- Analysis.” Journal of Child Clinical Psychology 29 (2): 257–265.

de Graaf, H., and J. Rademakers. 2006. “Sexual Development of Prepubertal Children.” Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 18 (1): 1–21.

Dilorio, C., E. I. Pluhar, and L. Belcher. 2003. “Parent–Child Communication about Sexuality: A Review of the Literature from 1980–2002.” Journal of HIV/AIDS Prevention & Education in Adolescents & Children 5 (34): 7–32.

DiIorio, C., E. I. Pluhar, K. Pines, and T. Jennings. 2006. “Set the P.A.C.E! An Intervention to Promote Mother–Child Communication about Sexuality and Reduce Sexual Risk Behaviors in Children Ages 6–12.” American Journal of Sexuality Education 1 (2): 3–24.

Downie, J. 1998. “Parents as Sexuality Educators: The Challenge for Nurses.” Neonatal, Paediatric and Child Health Nursing 1 (1): 12–17.

Ewing, S., and J. Thomas. 2010. The Internet in Australia: ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation. Swinburne: University of Technology, Institute for Social Research.

Friedrich, W. N., T. Sandfort, J. Oostveen, and P. Cohen-Kettenis. 2000. “Cultural Differences in Sexual Behavior: 2–6Year Old Dutch and American Children.” In Childhood Sexuality, edited by T. Sandfort and J. Rademakers, 117–129. New York, NY: Hamworth.

Geasler, M. J., L. L. Dannison, and C. J. Edlund. 1995. “Sexuality Education of Young Children: Parental Concerns.” Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies 44 (2): 184–188.

Huebner, A., and L. Howell. 2003. “Examining the Relationship between Adolsecent Sexual Risk- Taking and Perceptions of Monitoring, Communication and Parenting Styles.” Journal of Adolescent Health 33 (2): 71–78.

Huston, R. L., L. J. Martin, and D. M. Foulds. 1990. “Effect of a Program to Facilitate Parent–Child Communication about Sex.” Clinical Pediatrics 29 (11): 626–633.

Hutchinson, M. K., J. Jemmott, L. Jemmott Sweet, P. Braveman, and G. T. Fong. 2003. “The Role of Mother–Daughter Sexual Risk Communication in Reducing Sexual Risk Behaviors among Urban Adolescent Females: A Prospective Study.” Journal of Adolescent Health 33 (2): 98–107.

Jaccard, J., T. Dodge, and P. Dittus. 2002. “Parent–Adolescent Communication about Sex and Birth Control: A Conceptual Framework.” In Talking Sexuality: Parent–Adolescent Communication, edited by S. S. Feldman and D. A. Rosenthal, 9–41. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Jerman, P., and N. A. Constantine. 2010. “Demographic and Psychological Predictors of Parent– Adolescent Communication about Sex: A Representative Statewide Analysis.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 39 (10): 1164–1174.

Jones, R. K., and A. E. Biddlecom. 2011. “The More Things Change . . . : The Relative Importance of the Internet as a Source of Contraceptive Information for Teens.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 8 (1): 27–37.

Kees Martin, S. S., and F. S. Christopher. 1987. “Family Guided Sex Education: An Impact Study.” Social Casework 68 (6): 358–363.

Kirby, D., and B. C. Miller. 2002. “Interventions Designed to Promote Parent–Teen Communication about Sexuality.” In Talking Sexuality: Parent–Adolescent Communication. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, edited by S. Feldman and D. A. Rosenthal, 93–110. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Klein, J. D., P. Sabaratnam, B. Pazos, M. M. Auerbach, C. G. Havens, and M. J. Brach. 2005. “Evaluation of the Parents as Primary Sexuality Educators Program.” Journal of Adolescent Health 37 (Suppl. 3): S94–S99.

Lehr, S., C. DeIorio, W. Dudley, and J. Lipana. 2000. “The Relationship between Parent– Adolescent Communication and Safer Sex Behaviors in College Students.” Journal of Family Nursing 6 (2): 180–197.

Li, X., B. Stanton, and S. Feigelman. 2000. “Impact of Perceived Parental Monitoring on Adolescent Risk Behavior Over 4 Years.” Journal of Adolescent Health 27 (1): 49–56.

Mannison, M. 1988. “Families and Sex Education: The Personal Development Program in Queensland.” Australian Journal of Sex, Marriage & Family 9 (1): 6–20.

Sex Education 247

Martin, K. A., and J. M. C. Torres. 2014. “Where did I Come From? US Parents’ and Preschool Children’s Participation in Sexual Socialisation.” Sex Education 14 (2): 174–190.

Miller, K. S., B. A. Kotchick, D. Shannon, R. Forehand, and A. Y. Ham. 1998. “Family Communication about Sex: What Are Parents Saying and Are Their Adolescents Listening?” Family Planning Perspectives 30 (5): 218–235.

Pluhar, E. I., C. K. DiIorio, and F. McCarty. 2008. “Correlates of Sexuality Communication among Mothers and 6-12-Year-Old Children.” Child: Care, Health and Development 34 (3): 283–290.

Pluhar, E., T. Jennings, and C. DiIorio. 2006. “Getting an Early Start: Communication about Sexuality among Mothers and Children 6-10 Years Old.” Journal of HIV/AIDS Prevention in Children & Youth 7 (1): 7–35.

Sanders, M. R., and J. N. Kirby. 2012. “Consumer Engagement and the Development, Evaluation, and Dissemination of Evidence-Based Parenting Programs.” Behavior Therapy 43 (2): 236–250.

Sanders, M. R., and A. Morawska. 2010. Family Background Questionnaire. Brisbane: Parenting and Family Support Centre.

Smith, A., P. Agius, A. Mitchell, C. Barrett, and M. Pitts. 2009. Secondary Students and Sexual Health 2008. Melbourne: Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society, La Trobe University.

Stout, J. W., and F. P. Rivara. 1989. “Schools and Sex Education: Does it Work?” Pediatrics 83 (3): 375–379.

Turner, K. M., M. S. Sanders, and C. Markie-Dadds. 2003. Practitioner’s Manual for Primary Care Triple P. Milton, QLD: Triple P International.

Vimpani, G., G. Patton, and A. Hayes. 2002. “The Relevance of Child and Adolescent Development for Outcomes in Education, Health and Life Success.” In Children’s Health and Development: New Research Directions for Australia, edited by A. Sanson, 14–37. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Walker, J. 2004. “Parents and Sex Education–Looking Beyond ‘the Birds and the Bees’.” Sex Education 4 (3): 239–254.

Walker, J., and J. Milton. 2006. “Teachers’ and Parents’ Roles in the Sexuality Education of Primary School Children: A Comparison of Experiences in Leeds, UK and in Sydney, Australia.” Sex Education 6 (4): 415–428.

Walsh, A., E. Parker, and A. Cushing. 1999. “‘How Am I Gonna Answer this One?’: A Discourse Analysis of Fathers’ Accounts of Providing Sexuality Education for Young Sons.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 8 (2): 103–114.

Wurtele, S. K., L. L. Currier, E. I. Gillespie, and C. F. Franklin. 1991. “The Efficacy of a Parent Implemented Program for Teaching Preschoolers Personal Safety Skills.” Behavior Therapy 22 (1): 69–83.

Wurtele, S. K., E. I. Gillespie, L. L. Currier, and C. F. Franklin. 1992. “A Comparison of Teachers vs. Parents as Instructors of a Personal Safety Program for Preschoolers.” Child Abuse and Neglect 16 (1): 127–137.

248 A. Morawska et al.

Copyright of Sex Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.