Key Social Norms Take-aways Cultural taboos and stigma surrounding sexuality strongly shaped mothers’ attitudes and practices, discouraging open discussion and reinforcing silence around sexuality education. Mothers’ embarrassment, fear of making mistakes, and concern that discussing sexuality might encourage inappropriate curiosity interacted with limited institutional support to produce narrow, reactive teaching. The authors emphasize that culturally contextualized approaches are essential because cultural norms shape parental behaviors and attitudes toward sexuality discussions; effective programs should therefore address these social constraints while building mothers’ confidence and strengthening family–school collaboration.

Objectives The study explored how Indonesian mothers of adolescents with intellectual disabilities understand and provide sexuality education, including their attitudes, practices, perceived barriers, and support needs, and sought to identify principles for culturally relevant, practical, and developmentally appropriate parental support.

Methods This qualitative phenomenological study conducted in-depth, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with 10 mothers of adolescents aged 10–17 years with intellectual disabilities. Interviews were conducted in Bahasa Indonesia from November to December 2024 and lasted 60–90 minutes. The interview guide explored mothers’ knowledge and attitudes toward sexuality education, educational practices, barriers, roles, and support needs. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, with inductive coding and double-coding by two researchers. Social norms were explored qualitatively through mothers’ accounts of cultural taboos, stigma, social pressures, embarrassment, and perceived acceptability of discussing sexuality within families and communities rather than through a standardized norms measure.

Results Mothers generally understood sexuality education narrowly as teaching hygiene, private body parts, and protection from sexual abuse. Education was typically reactive, beginning during puberty or following specific behaviors, while topics such as consent, relationships, sexual orientation, and identity were largely absent. Mothers recognized the importance of sexuality education but experienced discomfort, low confidence, limited knowledge, fear of providing incorrect information, cultural taboos, stigma, insufficient training and materials, and limited school support. Despite these barriers, mothers viewed themselves as important educators and wanted structured training, multimodal teaching materials, continuous age-appropriate guidance, and stronger collaboration with schools.

Conclusions Mothers’ sexuality education practices remained narrow, fragmented, and reactive because of interacting personal, social, cultural, and structural barriers. The authors call for comprehensive, family-centered and culturally contextualized approaches that provide mothers with training and accessible teaching resources and establish stronger collaboration among families, schools, and institutions, enabling parents to shift toward proactive and comprehensive sexuality education that supports adolescents’ safety, wellbeing, and rights.