KROPS: NO for mandatory wellness education!

We are powerfully against wellness education – all the more so as mandatory!
The exclusion from the work of "sex wellness issues" is an action that does not alter the nature of the risks associated with this subject and, in fact, increases these risks. This is related to the fact that many parents may recognise,
That voluntary classes on "sexual health" remove risks and the subject is safe for their children. Meanwhile, the full subject wellness education – besides without the “sexual health” module:
1) is an anti-family subject,
2) allows to advance sex concept and transit, i.e. sex change,
3) allows to advance LGBTQ+ environments (lesbians, gays, transsexuals, queers),
4) violates the right of parents to rise children according to their own moral and spiritual beliefs,
5) is unlawful,
6. allows for an extension of the work to sexual subjects in the future.

1. Mandatory wellness Education – besides without the “sexual health” module – is an anti-family subject. In the program basis of this subject in many another modules are records hitting the value of marriage, household and children. In the "Social Health" section, there is, among another things, specified a evidence comparing matrimony with informal relationships:
‘The student shall search legal provisions concerning the powers and obligations related to
with the conclusion of a matrimony and with legal aspects of the functioning of informal unions in Poland".
[Medium School, "Social Health", Act of 2025, item 382 p. 24]
In the “mental health” section, there is simply a evidence showing motherhood as a origin of danger:
"The student discusses the needs of people with intellectual disorders at different stages of life, in peculiar eating disorders, depression (e.g. pregnancy depression, postpartum depression), anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, psychotic disorder and neurodegenerative disorder".
[Medium School , intellectual wellness Department, Act of 2025, item 382, p. 23]
Significantly, this evidence gives examples of depression only and only related situations
with kid and motherhood. There is no indication in this context as the origin of depression
like divorce. This clearly shows that the kid is seen as a wellness hazard.
The Social wellness section besides includes the following anti-family evidence
"The student honors the messages concerning the decisions of another people related to family, partner and parent life, including decisions on formal, informal, non-relationship, separation, divorce, separation, parenting, adoptive and foster parents, multi-children, childlessness, and understands the possible consequences of these life situations".
[Medium School, Social wellness Department, Act of 2025, item 382, p. 24]
The mention of matrimony was so omitted, and the decision to divorce is as valuable as the decision to build a large family. This kind of evidence is an indication that it doesn't truly substance what decision in relation to fertility is made due to the fact that they are all equally valuable. This anti-family and anti-procreative attitude of all wellness education will aggravate the demographic problems of our country.
2. Mandatory wellness Education – besides without the “sexual health” module – allows for the promotion of sex concept and transit, i.e. sex change. In the programme basis, the “Values and Attitudes” section states:

"The student understands that dignity and respect towards man exclude all forms of discrimination on grounds of human diversity".
[Medium School, “Values and Attitudes” Department, Act of 2025, item 382, p. 20]
This provision does not specify how "human diversity" should be understood. It is only reasonable to presume that this wording should be understood in specified a way as to exclude all forms of discrimination based, inter alia, on the diversity of sex identities. The exclusion of “all forms of discrimination” means, in this case, the request to recognise as a actual sex concept, according to which whether you are a boy or a girl does not prejudge your body, but subjective feeling. The deficiency of designation of this concept as actual can be understood according to this evidence as discrimination.

It confirms that the slogan "exclusion of all forms of discrimination against diversity" is to be understood as meaning the content conveyed to wellness education teachers in the school's "Sex diversity – obligations and opportunities to support students" training organised by the Center for Education improvement under the auspices of MEN on 21.11.2025. At this training, the sex concept was presented as apparent and non-alternative. As the only, apparent
and the non-alternative solution to the problem of not accepting your body and sex has been presented a transition, or alleged sex change.

The promotion of sex concept and related transit is besides included in the publication "Health Education. A textbook for teachers" besides addressed to parents and students.

Training of wellness education teachers to advance transit in school means in practice the introduction of a wide scope of activities to schools. The first step on the transit way is to address students by the name of the other sex in a situation where the student wishes to do so and to make rooms available according to the sex rule of the perceived sex (e.g. making the female toilet available to the boy who identifies himself as a girl). At the end of the transit process is taking other sex hormones and mutilating your own body, e.g. breast amputation in a girl identified as a boy. It's irreparable harm and devastate of health. In this context, it can be seen that the subject called ‘Health Education’ leads to wellness damage. It's actually anti-health!

3. Mandatory wellness education – besides without the “sexual health” module – allows promotion of LGBTQ+ (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transsexuals, queers). The above mentioned entry from the programme basis:

"The student understands that dignity and respect towards man exclude all forms of discrimination on grounds of human diversity".
[Medium School, “Values and Attitudes” Department, Act of 2025, item 382, p. 20]
it can be understood as a ban on any criticism of LGBTQ+ environments,
where diversity is promoted: sex identity, sexual relationships, sexual expression or alleged sexual orientation In this regard, criticism of the right of 2 men to adopt a kid can be considered discrimination due to the diversity of relationships and sexual orientations.

4. Mandatory wellness Education – besides without the "sexual health" module – violates parents' rights. Parents have the right to rise their children according to their own beliefs. This law is certified by the Constitution of Poland. Meanwhile, the full subject wellness education contains content contrary to the beliefs of many parents: it hits the pattern of matrimony and family, promotes sex concept and transit, promotes LGBTQ environments. In addition, children
In classes IV-VI, they are to learn, among others, about their parents' obligations, which leads to a situation in which a kid takes a controlling function towards adults and weakens the authority of parents. The compulsory participation of children in these classes is so an attack on the rights of parents.

5. Mandatory wellness Education – besides without the “sexual health” module – is an illegal subject. This subject substance is incompatible with the Act of 7 January 1993.
about household planning, the protection of the human fetus and the conditions of the admissibility of abortion (Journal of Laws of 2022 item 1575), which obliges the school erstwhile undertaking the subject of sexuality to indicate the value of the family. Paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the Act states: cognition of the sexual life of a person, the principles of conscious and liable parenthood, household value, prenatal life and methods and means of conscious procreation is introduced into school curricula. This law is referred to by a regulation laying down the principles of teaching ‘Health Education’, although this subject is in its entirety anti-family and anti-procreative, and so does not meet the conditions of that law.

Childhood, unlike the sex education model of wellness education, communicates all the content provided by the legislator to the students
In the household Planning Act.

6. Mandatory wellness Education – now without the sexual wellness module
–allows an easy extension to sexual issues in the future. The compulsoryness of the full subject gives emergence to the inclusion of sexual education in the field of compulsory subjects in the future. Currently, this subject has been removed due to social opposition and upcoming parliamentary elections, but from the statements of the MEN's representatives it follows that these topics will yet besides fall within the scope of compulsory wellness education. Just a one-man decision by the Minister of Education.

The exclusion from the work of "sexual wellness issues" does not destruct the abovementioned risks. It is justified that:
1) does not prevent the students from encountering harmful content from the classes,
2. is only temporary,
3) is now an empty wording.

1) The exclusion from the work of "sex wellness issues" will not prevent children from encountering content considered harmful by their parents. Not only that the full subject is anti-family and gender-based, students who have been enrolled in the “sexual knowledge” classes can in various ways encounter anti-family, gender-based
and demoralizing the content presently accumulated in the “sexual health” module. This may happen for example by:
Contact with complete textbooks and educational aids prepared for all students, which will most likely include the content of the “sexual health” module;
Talks with peers participating in these classes;
Contact with textbooks addressed to teachers and parents
And students. This publication is “Health Education. Teachers' Handbook available free of charge online. This textbook mentions, for example, the alleged Human Sexual Rights, and among them, the "Right to Sexual Pleasure". In the manual we can read: Sexual pleasure, including autoerotic behavior, is simply a origin of physical, psychological, intellectual and spiritual well-being.” This kind of content is the promotion of masturbation in the name of pleasance and "good-being";
The applicable coercion to participate in these classes due to the inability to supply care to students in the mediate of classes outside the classroom, together with the information that ‘they request not’ focus on the content of the lesson;
The teachers are discussing the content of the “sexual health” module erstwhile discussing subjects from another modules.

2. The exclusion from the work of the “sexual health” module is only temporary. As has already been mentioned, compulsory subject-matter wellness education is the basis for making sexual education compulsory at the earliest chance convenient for the current MEN authorities. This conclusion is based on a number of statements made by representatives of the MEN, in which the work of sexual education is indicated as the goal they are pursuing and which they will sooner or later want to introduce.

3) The exclusion from the work of the “sexual health” module is now an empty wording.
 The Communication on the MEN website states that "The Minister of Education Barbara Nowacka has set up an expert squad that will examine the existing wellness education programming basis and will indicate the circumstantial content that will be optional". It turns out, therefore, that it will not necessarily should be excluded from the work of the “sexual health” department as defined in the current regulations, but that this will only be indicated by the appointed by
min. B. Nowacka team. It may so be that most of the content in the current section "sexual health" will be indicated as mandatory.
It is besides unclear in this situation that any of the topics identified in the current programming basis are optional.
The team's coordinator was Zbigniew Izdebski. He's not a doctor, he's a sexologist. publically promotes the thought of the right to “get laid without love, for pleasure.” He can be arrogant to cooperate with the Kinsey Institute in the United States. Kinsey, as Judith Reisman established, an American sex education researcher, committed pedophile acts, conducting sexual experiments on children (J. Reisman, Kinsey). Crime and science. Alfred Kinsey and Sexual Experiments on Children, Krakow 2024). Under the direction of Z. Izdebski, the first ed. wellness programming basis was established in 2024, which contains content that can be successfully described as inferno, then removed.
The “expert team” are, from the erstwhile team: Antonina Kopyt [on her website is portrayed as Tosia Kopyt psychologist, sex educator, wellness education teacher. She has collaborated with the SexedPL Foundation and Feder's feminist organization; co-author of the script “Lection without taboos”, during which, among others, children in grades IV-VI of primary school are taught about contraception] and Aleksandra Lewandowska [a psychiatrist, a national consultant in the field of kid and youth psychiatry], as well as Dariusz Samborski [dentist, head of the territory Medical Chamber in Lublin], Joanna Napier [a lawyer, since September 2025 president of the State Commission on Anti- Sexual usage of Minors].
It is yet Z. Izdebski and coordinated by the squad who will decide what content about sexuality students will gotta adopt mandatoryly, that is, under duress.
 The Communication on the MEN website states: "The fresh government will be ready as shortly as possible, taking into account the legislative process, namely consultation
and arrangements, surely before the start of the fresh school year". So at the moment, there is no formal decision on wellness education in the form of an existing regulation – there is only the announcement that specified a decision will be taken before 1.09.b. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that all wellness education will be compulsory in this Regulation only announced. There were already announcements from min. B. Nowacka, which were not implemented by her (e.g. that the decision on wellness education will be made by the end of March).
There is so a double announcement in the MEN messages. On the 1 hand, there's an announcement to shut down
from the work of the “sexual health” department (clearly defined in the regulations), on the another hand, is the announcement that what will be excluded from the work will only be indicated
In the future. This kind of double prediction has the hallmarks of manipulating and knowingly misleading parents. What is to be voluntary in wellness education is presently unspecified and can be freely modified.

We want to emphasise that compulsory wellness education is:
A disregard for the public's will to discharge 70% of its pupils in the 2025/26 school year. Currently, around 30% of students participate in wellness education classes, which proves powerfully that parents reject this subject
and adult pupils;
To deprive parents and adults of the right to choose about these activities. In school year 2025/26, wellness education was voluntary. Now this right of choice has been taken from parents and adult students. This is another step towards making the country the first kid educator and removing parents from this place. State officials are illegally expanding their competence in the field of education while limiting parents' rights;
Violence against children, youth and parents.

We are definitely protesting against this anti-democratic, manipulative and unlawful violence!

At the same time, we demand:
To destruct the subject wellness education! This is the only way to defend 4.1 million children's students from anti-family, gender, ideological, illegal, violent and harmful messages;
The restoration of household education in school! specified a 25 - year - tested subject is raising to a family. This subject puts sexual themes in the context of love, matrimony and family. It is besides pro-demographic;
The restoration of wellness teaching on 10 subjects, as it has been so far! This solution appreciates the competence of teachers to undertake wellness issues on their subjects. It besides allows the subject of human development, especially puberty, in the natural context of biology and nature.

We besides request the immediate resignation of Minister Barbara Nowacka! Her actions hit the correct improvement of children and young people and in various ways break the law.

KROPS coordinators
Hanna Dobrowolska, School Protection Movement
Agnieszka Pawlik-Regulska, Association of Teachers and Educators “Teachers for Freedom”
mec. Marek Puzio, Foundation Institute for Legal Culture Ordo Iuris
Elżbieta Lachman, Polish Parent Forum
Dr. Zbigniew Barciński, NATAN Pedagogy Association