Conceding that the average public-school teacher has one essential qualification for giving such instruction, i. e., the confidence of the children, her incapacity because of the lack of a broad scientific knowledge of the subject, or youth, or both, is generally recognized. The other alternative--special lecturers of known scientific qualifications--is open to the suggestion that they would soon be known as “sex specialists” and the presentation of the subject under these conditions would place upon it an undue emphasis instead of having it taught in its natural and orderly sequence as a part of nature-study, biology, and ethics where it belongs. So, also, the children’s lack of confidence in an outside lecturer would minimize the good results of such information. Physicians are generally regarded as the proper persons to give this instruction, although the suggestion has been made that inasmuch as the ideal instruction must concern the normal function of sex, and that a physician’s work is chiefly along the abnormal line (disease) and a tendency to the development of certain morbidity necessarily results therefrom--the biologist, especially if a regular instructor, is the one best equipped for this delicate task. There is an ever-present danger, either from unqualified teachers or wrong pedagogic methods, of unduly emphasizing the topic in such a manner that the curiosity of the child will be stimulated. This is the very result which should be avoided; the boy should be given only enough instruction, as an incidental part of one of the broader subjects with which it is intimately related, to satisfy his natural curiosity and suffice the physical and ethical requirements of his particular stage of development. On the other hand, the difficulties connected with sex-instruction should not be unduly stressed, for they are not insurmountable. By whatever instrumentality the instruction is given to classes it is agreed that, as in private instruction, the information should be only sufficient to satisfy the psychological and physical needs of the child at the period of development which he has then attained. During the period of adolescence the scope of information is, therefore, greatly broadened to meet the requirements of that period. The opponents of sex-instruction in schools believe that it will obtrude the subject too prominently in the consciousness of the youth and thereby destroy the restraints of modesty which were intended to be conserved. The advocates of the school plan insist that the beneficent results of such instruction will greatly outweigh any possible evil which may follow from it. They submit that the moral and physical dangers to which children are subject as the result of ignorance, and the presence of venereal disease in boys to a degree not understood by the general public, are sufficient warrant for such instruction--wholly apart from other considerations.