SA Education Department Admits Breach As Anti-17c起草社区IA+ Lawsuit Against School Continues

News South Australia

Michael James
April 26, 2026

Image: Giovanni Portello / ADF International

A mother who is suing a South Australian school with the backing of an anti-17c起草社区IA+ group has seen the government admit some level of fault in the proceedings.

The state government has now formally conceded it breached its duty of care to a student during a life education session at school.

The case centres on a 2024 鈥淩espectful Relationships鈥� session that sparked national debate around sex education, parental consent and 17c起草社区IA+ inclusion.

Court action backed by Anti-17c起草社区IA+ hate group

The dispute traces back to March 2024 at Renmark High School, where Year 9 girls attended an hour long presentation delivered by a third-party provider linked to Headspace.

The session, designed to promote inclusivity and respectful relationships, became the subject of complaints after students alleged they were exposed to inappropriate sexual content.

In December 2025, The 17c起草社区 reported that mother of six Nicki Gaylard planned legal action against the South Australian Department of Education, backed by Alliance Defending Freedom International, a group widely criticised for its anti-17c起草社区IA+ stance.

At the time, Gaylard claimed her daughter had been exposed to explicit references, including incest and bestiality, during a discussion of the 鈥減lus鈥� in 17c起草社区IA+.

The presenter allegedly spoke in sexually explicit terms about their own sexual preferences, and spoke about incest, using terms such as 鈥渟ister love鈥�, 鈥渂rother love鈥�.

鈥淭here was a slide for what the 鈥榩lus鈥� means, and they just started randomly saying words that no-one knew, like bestiality,鈥� one student told the聽ABC聽at the time.

鈥淚t was on the board when they were showing what the 鈥榩lus鈥� meant.鈥�

The Department apologised for the presentation, describing it as 鈥渘ot acceptable鈥�, and suspended the provider involved.

Government admits breach but denies harm

As the case continues the South Australian government has now formally admitted in court documents that it breached its duty of care to the student.

鈥淭he first respondent admits that it breached a non-delegable duty of care to [Courtney] by failing to review the content of the presentation by FocusOne Health prior to its delivery, and by failing to notify and seek parental consent from [Ms Gaylard] prior to the delivery of the presentation to Year 9 students,鈥� the defence states.

However, the government is continuing to fight the case, arguing that neither the student nor her mother suffered harm as a result.

It is also seeking to have the case dismissed and disputes several of the more serious allegations about the presentation鈥檚 content.

鈥淭he presenters at FocusOne Health did not represent that bestiality was included in LGBTIQA+ acronym and did not expressly or impliedly encouraged the normalisation of bestiality to the [Courtney] and other Year 9 girls,鈥� the defence states.

鈥淭he presenters at FocusOne Health did not represent that incest was included in the LGBTIQA+ acronym and did not in any way condone or encourage the [Courtney] and other Year 9 girls to engage in incestuous conduct.鈥�

The government further maintains that while images of surgical scars were shown, they were 鈥渘ot graphic, indecent, unlawful or inappropriate鈥�.

Gaylard is seeking $250,000 in damages, alleging her daughter experienced lasting trauma and that parents were sidelined in decisions about sensitive classroom content.

鈥淭here鈥檚 a lot of trauma for my entire family after this occurred,鈥� she said.

鈥淎nd it鈥檚 obvious that it still affects us, even today. Some might feel like it鈥檚 so long ago, but it still lurks. You can鈥檛 erase what you hear and what you see. It鈥檚 not that easy. These things sit with you, and possibly for the rest of our lives.鈥�

鈥淚鈥檓 seeking justice for my daughter, who was deeply affected by what she saw that day.鈥�

Gaylard made claims that the trauma experienced by the students was extensive.

鈥淗er childhood was shortened through exposure to completely inappropriate material headspace won鈥檛 even let me see. How can they be happy to show children what they are ashamed to show adults? Let children be children. Transparency, accountability, and respect for parental rights are essential.鈥�

Robert Clarke, director of advocacy for Alliance Defending Freedom International, echoed Gaylards statements.

鈥淣o parent should be kept in the dark about what their child is being taught” he said.

鈥淭ransparency, accountability, and respect for parental rights are essential,鈥� Mr Clarke said.

鈥淭his case highlights the urgent need to ensure that parents are not sidelined in decisions affecting their children.鈥�

Following the incident, Headspace conducted a review and acknowledged 鈥渢here were aspects of the presentation that were not appropriate for young people鈥�, while strengthening oversight of third-party presenters.

The Department has maintained the incident was isolated, stating safeguards have since been tightened to ensure content aligns with the Australian Curriculum.

17c起草社区