Girlguides - is it a lost cause?

Complain about a charity

Complain to the charity directly unless you suspect illegal activity, like terrorism or abuse.

Contact the police on 101 if you suspect illegal activity.

If you are not happy with how the charity deals with your complaint, contact the relevant regulator.

www.gov.uk/complain-about-charity

DBS - Reporting concerns.

The Government provides this information:

”Report someone as unfit to work with children or vulnerable adults”

Parents or members of the public who are concerned about someone working with children or vulnerable adults should contact the police, social services or the person’s employer.

Refer someone to Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)

Employers must refer someone to DBS if they:

• sacked them because they harmed someone

• sacked them or changed their role because they might have harmed someone

• were planning to sack them for either of these reasons, but they resigned first

You’re breaking the law if you do not refer someone to DBS when you should.

Contact the helpline for help referring someone to DBS.

DBS helpline
Telephone: 0300 0200 190

www.gov.uk/report-unfit-work-children-vulnerable-adults

I think so - maybe change their social media policy so that these things aren't visible. It would take a massive about turn to change their way of thinking. They are so far down this blind alleyway and there is the sunken costs fallacy.

So what do we think, are GG just going to wait until the mainstream media move onto another story?

Agree @MrsFin that was my point. We had a great deal of training, mdt meetings about this and on going risk assessments JUST to support teens to access gp or sexual health clinics to have hcp provide contraception.

We would never have been allowed to hand it out ourselves under any circumstance, even the most senior social work staff, even with the 16/17 year old pupils.

Any adult handing out contraception is leaving themselves open to accusations of abuse, is teaching children adults who do this are safe when they aren’t outside of HCP very select remit regarding prescribing or providing contraception.

I’ve worked in residential social work where it was very well known that our teens were sexually active.

We supported them to their gp for the pill and to sexual health clinics for contraception/std testing.

All of which required very strict risk assessment done by a mdt meeting and evidence of work done to educate them about safer sex, consent and so on.

Never would it be considered acceptable for any member of staff to hand these out, even the most senior members of the social work team. Always it had to directly come from a hcp. And that was true for the 16/17 year old teens we were responsible for also.

You worked.
I expect you were trained.
Guiders are volunteers and most definitely not trained in handling the sort of situation you describe, and not should they be.

a) is this because it's being shoved through by people with highly personal agendas and no training or knowledge whatsoever that qualifies them to advise on children or safeguarding?

b) is this because those people have repeatedly been told (Whittle on this very board) but are utterly determined on their own agenda regardless to the cost of females of all ages?

c) is this because those who are capable and qualified have either shut up, knuckled under and been too afraid to stand up for the needs of children in their care over the desires and needs of middle aged adults to make use of the situation to their own benefit, and seen what has happened to those who resist and whistleblow?

I would suspect the reflection has happened. And that it's been done anyway. And I would be deleted and banned if I spoke my mind here about what this looks like.

I’m another one who’s horrified and disgusted by the whole thing.

I’d already decided not to enrol my daughter at Rainbows given my safeguarding concerns and now this absolute shitshow has come out.

Firing women for raising genuine concerns and instead hiring men who get their kicks from dressing up as women, BDSM and guns and happily showcase this across social media. NO.

What is going on. They’ve all lost their minds at HQ.

I went to rainbows, brownies and guides as a youngster and loved them all. I’m so angry that my daughter now will lose out on these experiences because GG thinks it’s better to prioritise men than focus on the girls their organisation was created for.

It’s a DISGRACE

It is an abhorrent lack of care Doubletoil.

But of course some children are sexualised early. They need help, support and protection.

Some people think that the solution is to sexualise all children early and give them all condoms ans sex toys. This drives me insane.

We supported them to their gp for the pill and to sexual health clinics for contraception/std testing.

All of which required very strict risk assessment done by a mdt meeting and evidence of work done to educate them about safer sex, consent and so on.

Never would it be considered acceptable for any member of staff to hand these out, even the most senior members of the social work team. Always it had to directly come from a hcp. And that was true for the 16/17 year old teens we were responsible for also.

Perhaps Units should collectively refuse to hand over subs until there is a satisfactory resolution of issues. Lack of funds could help force the issue?

The inclusion agenda is being bulldozed through both organisations it seems. Without sufficient refection on where it could conflict or go wrong.

A quick look on Girlguiding's website via google and it seems the pages advising about condoms have been taken down.

I must say that I have taken girls on lots of camps and indoor residentials, including huge jamborees with thousands of guides and scouts and have never "doled out" condoms, or felt the need to have them in the first place!
On all camps there are rules in place to keep children safe: including not going into other people's tents, visiting other groups with out asking, wondering off on your own. All the common sense things you would expect.
Can I also say that leaders do not share showers or toilets with girls and certainly do not share tents or bedrooms. The only exception to this would be at a sleepover in a hall or museum, where we would set up a leaders area in a corner.

This whole thing makes me incredibly angry and sad. This whole push to be "inclusive" is destroying a wonderful organisation. Just look at the number of people saying they won't let their daughters join.

I think it is deliberate, women and girls are to be allowed nothing, we are non men, not valued or respected and anything belonging to us is to be taken over or destroyed.

I think it shows again the massive divide between HQ and what actual leaders are doing. I can’t for a minute imagine a leader taking a group of guides away and telling them where the emergency condoms are.

This is because you and the leaders you know are doing an ethical and appropriate job. The problems come when someone without that approach and there’s space and even policies that allow massive safeguarding failings to happen.

So are 13 year old boy-children offered condoms if someone wants to assault them, or is that just reserved for the girls? It’s rape, “helping” is NOT providing contraception it’s protecting those girls from underage sex aka rape.

[quote averylongtimeago]Scouts also say that a trans boy/girl can choose their sleeping area, and recommend having gender neutral toilets and showers. They do also suggest screens/rotas for privacy.

www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers/inclusion-and-diversity/including-everyone/lgbtplus/transgender-and-gender-identity/supporting-trans-young-people/[/quote]
Oh ffs thought they’d learnt something from all their multiple scandals but clearly not

Scouts also say that a trans boy/girl can choose their sleeping area, and recommend having gender neutral toilets and showers. They do also suggest screens/rotas for privacy.

www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers/inclusion-and-diversity/including-everyone/lgbtplus/transgender-and-gender-identity/supporting-trans-young-people/

Yup, it's the condoning of statutory rape that I find mind boggling. Presumably GG had a lawyer involved in drawing up this code. Was there a conversation in which the lawyer pointed out issuing condoms to minors is facilitating statutory rape and GG said 'Nah, no probs'?

I used to work with 14-19 year olds and on my life, if I'd ever had to sign up to a policy that meant I would be giving out condoms to 14 year olds I'd have walked out.

They have lost their collective minds and have been very heavily influenced and just cannot see a way out.

I just hope they use this as an opportunity to roll everything back.

what do you do if the condom breaks?

I know, I know!!! I read the guidelines.

They can take a child under 16 for STD check and the morning after pill. But they will only encourage the child to tell her parents, so the parents may never find out.

I'm agog at the condom policy. Do GGUK have any concept of duty of care? The minute you put yourself in a position where you are doling out contraception, is there not a corresponding duty to teach the child how to use the thing, what to do if it breaks, the need to request emergency contraception etc? Giving out a condom is not just an isolated event. If I was a disgruntled and litigious parent, and my child received a personal injury or became pregnant as a result of sex, facilitated with a GG condom, and sex that would not have happened without the condom, I would be suing. And I simply cannot get my head around GGUK condoning facilitating statutory rape.

The concerns expressed in this thread about GG naivety have nothing to do with reducing teens dating opportunities