Today’s daily dose of LangCleg sense

My friend works in a school. I could cry.

A lot of people who work in environments governed by Safeguarding frameworks dont understand fundamental Safeguarding principles. They may well be very adept at following what are perceived to be specific 'rules' of the workplace but the fact they cannot or do not apply them in other circumstances is the indicator that they are not understood.

All adults have the responsibility to Safeguard children & vulnerable adults in all circumstances & at all times.

About a year ago they started attending a Youth Club for children in this situation. My friend literally had the door pushed in her face on the first occasion she took them there. She was told no parents, we have children here who don't feel comfortable dressing in a different gender in front of adults, so we respect their privacy.

This is deeply concerning.

Parents/adults can/should ask questions of all youth clubs /groups. Who are the adults involved, what are their qualifications for working with children, what are their Safeguarding policies.

The phrase is “ when you hear hooves , think horses not zebras “.

Well, no, in the case of EDS, which I've got, the saying is hear hooves think zebras

It’s commonly used to remind medical practitioners seeking a diagnosis to consider ( and if necessary rule out ) the obvious things first.

Again, in the case of EDS it means think of rare things, don't assume it's the obvious because it might not be.

The name is totally to do with a diagnosis of ehlers danlos syndrome, nothing else.

My friend's daughter (15) wants to transition to male. About a year ago they started attending a Youth Club for children in this situation. My friend literally had the door pushed in her face on the first occasion she took them there. She was told no parents, we have children here who don't feel comfortable dressing in a different gender in front of adults, so we respect their privacy.

She didn't meet any of the people her daughter went on to discuss life changing issues with. I don't think she knows who any of them are, what their backgrounds are. I asked her at the time about safeguarding, if they had undergone DBR checks etc? She looked at me like I was being unkind and suspicious. Her answer was oh I'm sure they're all ok, they're all people who've been through the same thing.

A couple of weeks later she told me that her daughter had told her she couldn't work out if the person she had been speaking to at the Youth Club was male or female. They both thought this was fantastic. Her daughter had no idea who this adult was, name, anything.

My friend works in a school. I could cry.

They didnt break confidentiality.
They were working within a confidentiality framework which makes clear that responsible adults do not promise to keep secrets about risks of harm to the child or others

It's so crushing for me to see this framework being destroyed in schools. I would have been such a sucker for a sympathetic adult who promised to be my special confidante, more so if they told me they had answers for my problems. That I could escape being a girl. That my parents didn't understand me, but they did. I would have been so eager to go to special youth group meetings, and wouldn't have thought it the least bit strange that some members weren't youths.

Every day that this basic principle is ignored in schools, young people are getting hurt.

Yes, that's the right way to think about it. It's not breaking confidentiality, it's working therapeutically within a boundaried relationship. One of those boundaries is confidentiality which has exceptions attached - harm to self and others and some legal statutes.

This is made clear at the outset, so the person receiving counselling knows that there are instances where, for their own safety and that of others, the counsellor will consider passing the appropriate and relevant information to a third party. Best practice is for the counsellor to discuss this with their client, that they intended to do so, and work with them in this. Again, this ensures the client can see that the counsellor is working in their best interests, and it helps to maintain the working alliance.

I've started a thread about meeting with representatives from a council education department regarding their gender identity policy for schools in the area.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3804103-Safeguarding-advice-needed-gender-identity-policy-in-schools

If anyone has any advice about how I can explain to them that their policy goes against safeguarding principles, please can you post on there? I'm not an expert on this, but I need to be able to point out to them the problems with their policy.

In my opinion as the parent, and according to safeguarding rules, the counsellor acted correctly when they broke confidentiality.

They didnt break confidentiality.
They were working within a confidentiality framework which makes clear that responsible adults do not promise to keep secrets about risks of harm to the child or others

*DD (

Re Hooves' point about children requesting confidentiality from an adult, which I know other posters have also responded to, this is my example:

DD (

Stillathing I came on to say the same as R0wantrees; that is such an excellent point.

As you say, for many abused and vulnerable children having secrets between them and adults is normal, and toxic. Knowing the adult you're talking to and confiding in only has your best interests at heart, which includes disclosure, is modelling a healthy open relationship. It centres the child, not the adults needs or desires.

It's worth noting that some children looking to disclose have already been harmed by adults making them keep secrets. It is common in toxic family relationships as a way of keeping outside interference at bay, as well as abusers using coercion and threat to keep a child quiet. These children may try very hard to get a teacher to keep a secret because that's what feels normal to them. It is the responsibility of the teacher /other professional to model a different way of relating.

This is such an important point.
Teachers & other professionals do this as part of Safeguarding children.

Safeguarding always fails when the fundamental principles are bent.

For example, children under 16 cannot consent to sex with adults.
This applies to all children & is a Safeguard based on age.
Some adults believed this did not apply to particular groups of girls whilst in Care in Manchester, this was based on their interpretion. The girls were not Safeguarded, predatory males exploited the failing & vulnerable children were abused.

Blimey! I didn't know that hooves/zebras thing.

The stuff I've learned in the few months I've been here is astounding.

Thank you all xxx

Promising to keep secrets doesn't help them

It's worth noting that some children looking to disclose have already been harmed by adults making them keep secrets. It is common in toxic family relationships as a way of keeping outside interference at bay, as well as abusers using coercion and threat to keep a child quiet. These children may try very hard to get a teacher to keep a secret because that's what feels normal to them. It is the responsibility of the teacher /other professional to model a different way of relating.

I forgot to say thank you for reposting this excellent reminder of Safeguarding basics.

And thanks for the gvmt guidelines R0wantrees

And totally agree that it's when the rules are bent for different situations is the point at which safeguarding could start to fail

Langbanned I don't know the answer to that question, I have various ideas but none of them make sense. I'm reading "The madness of crowds" by Douglas Murray, which examines the current hysteria of identity politics. It's fascinating and frightening, seeing how debate is being closed down. I hope by the end of it I may be a little clearer as to the answer to your question.

I think that when a child gets to the point that they want to tell someone about what has happened or is happening to then then they know that they need help.

Promising to keep secrets doesn't help them

People who understand Safeguarding build relationships with & support children all the time. When a child discloses, its vital that adults understand the core established principles of how to best support them.

I think some people don't realise that there are legal ramifications to safeguarding and that professionals are very clear on what they have to do (or should be!). We don't have a choice about this.

This is true - so why are so many guidance documents being promoted to schools actually suggesting keeping secrets? Why aren't more safeguarding leads just saying 'no, nope. Legally can't do that. Safeguarding'.

I don't understand why it's got to this point. (I'm not expecting anyone to have the answers, I just truly don't really understand how it's got to this point - this is when we bloody need Lang bet she'd be able to have a good go at answering).

I think it's great to have this discussion. Many ordinary people don't fully understand safeguarding. I hope reading this makes some people think. Especially those working in organisations that have bought in training that contradicts safeguarding.

I think that when a child gets to the point that they want to tell someone about what has happened or is happening to then then they know that they need help.

Promising to keep secrets doesn't help them. Maybe the promise should be that you will help them to approach the appropriate people who can help them

There is a difference between an adult approaching a child and asking for a private chat and a child approaching say a teacher and requesting a confidential chat. There should be safeguarding rules within the organisation to cover these occasions

There are Safeguarding principles & legislation which inform organisatons' policies. They are the same principles & legislation for any organisation which has contact with children & vulnerable adults.

The same principles, legislation & policies apply in both situations.

Safeguarding is not a list of rules with exceptions open to different interpretations

Hooves: I think the problem is that people are so frustrated and worried by the apparent, and in some cases obvious, blurring of boundaries in this area. Some areas of life really are black and white - the potential consequences are too dangerous. We can't allow Mr or Ms X to break safeguarding guidelines because "they'd never do anything" or "we should all be nice to each other" or "what about how x would feel?"

That approach just isn't mature enough, it doesn't address the reality of some people's motivations. So to suggest, even obliquely, that there is room for manoeuvre in safeguarding won't go down well here. Unfortunately it would go down really well with lots of people with bad intentions, which is exactly why it has to be non-negotiable. Anybody trying to change the parameters, or skew power in one direction or another, will quite rightly be questioned. I'm not accusing you of this, just explaining why I think posters are responding in a particular way to your posts.