Why didn’t you simply answer the question?

I'd definitely accept there is content that some 9-14yos wouldn't have the necessary mental or emotional development to deal well with, and that risks negatively impacting their mental health and turning them towards troublesome behaviour if their home environment is less than ideal. But we've been exposing kids to religious texts that are full of all sorts of horrific descriptions for centuries and it doesn't seem to have done so much harm as to justify removing such books from libraries completely. From what I've read the new books mostly seem rather innocuous - is there really reason to believe they're likely to stir up never- before-seen levels of angst or self-doubt among schoolkids? Or encourage dangerous experimentation with irreversible downsides? That there may be some temporary negative side-effects I'd think is just a price all kids have to pay learning about the more complicated world of adulthood and sexual desires etc., and you can hardly hide that world from them forever.

It was a reasonable question. I think you should answer it rather than counter-interrogate.

Also, you started out mentioning 'teen and pre-teen children', then narrowed it to 'children age 9-14'. Most people assume 'teen' to cover anyone up to the age of 18, at which point they're no longer legally a child.