Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

(Scottish) Teachers fear legal action over transgender pupil advice

38 replies

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 25/09/2021 09:58

In the Herald

www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19604640.teachers-fear-legal-action-transgender-pupil-advice/

Excerpts:

Leaders at the Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association (SSTA) said their upcoming Congress would see members debate an emergency motion that claims ministers are seeking to make changes without establishing a clear legislative basis. It calls for the guidance to be withdrawn until such an “underpinning” is enacted.

The guidance states: “A transgender young person may not have told their family about their gender identity. Inadvertent disclosure could cause needless stress for the young person or could put them at risk and breach legal requirements. Therefore, it is best to not share information with parents or carers without considering and respecting the young person’s views and rights.”

SSTA concerns focus largely on what happens to details disclosed by a pupil and whether these can be passed on without their consent. Its leaders said there were deepening fears over the professional and legal risks for teachers who are recipients of such information.

The SSTA motion states: “In view of the recently published document ‘Supporting Transgender Pupils in Schools - Guidance for Scottish Schools’ (August 2021), this Congress is greatly concerned over safeguarding and other issues, including: the potential excluding of parents/carers from the process of children under 16 transitioning to another gender; implying that teachers may not pass on information that may be revealed to them by a child without the child’s consent; the potential for professional harm to staff involved in withholding information from parents/carers, including future legal action; that the identified ‘best practice’ has not been rigorously examined for its legal implications nor risk assessed for potential harm it may cause others in the school community, including those with protected characteristics.”

It concludes: “Congress believes it is unacceptable for the government to seek to make such consequential changes without legal underpinning. Congress therefore calls on the guidance to be withdrawn until appropriate legislation has been enacted which can then inform the guidance to be disseminated to schools.”

I have no idea how significant this is?

OP posts:
zanahoria · 25/09/2021 11:34

So teachers are being asked to implement a policy.

They know it is wrong.

They are turning round and taking action through their unions.

Furthermore, they know the law is on their side.

That is hugely significant.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 25/09/2021 11:32

Teachers are right to be worried. There will be a court case eventually. I know of several families who have considered challenging schools in the courts for trying to remove their parental rights in this way by transitioning their child in secret. But (quite rightly) they centred their vulnerable child's needs and decided against it.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 25/09/2021 11:28

@EndoplasmicReticulum

I just had safeguarding refresher training at the start of the new term and it's the first thing they tell you "never promise a young person that you can keep what they tell you a secret"

Why should this be a special case? Does it not put a hole into safeguarding? Is that a bug, or a feature?

It seems to be a feature Endoplasmic. Isolating children from those who love them care for them and have legal responsibility for them is such a massive safeguarding 🚩 🚩.

I am always in shock (despite seeing this repeatedly in recent years) that anyone can promote this. It is the essence of predatory behaviour to isolate a child from those who care for them.

Deliriumoftheendless · 25/09/2021 11:25

So when speaking to the parents misgendering is suddenly ok?

EndoplasmicReticulum · 25/09/2021 11:22

I just had safeguarding refresher training at the start of the new term and it's the first thing they tell you "never promise a young person that you can keep what they tell you a secret"

Why should this be a special case? Does it not put a hole into safeguarding? Is that a bug, or a feature?

Jaysmith71 · 25/09/2021 11:12

....and we have far too many people at the moment who don't appear to understand the distinction between Law and Policy.

Jaysmith71 · 25/09/2021 11:10

This is Law vs Policy, and there's only one winner in that fight.

Alekto · 25/09/2021 11:10

Good comments. Lots of voices speaking up now.

ArabellaScott · 25/09/2021 10:51

Good. I really feel for teachers, stuck in an impossible position, and, as noted above, leaving themselves open to litigation.

SNP continues to ignore the people it proclaims to serve, though - still trying to push through shit legislation 'for our own good', no matter what all the experts tell them.

endofagain · 25/09/2021 10:29

@Wellthatsit

Surely this contradicts the usual safeguarding guidance that we must never promise to keep something secret when a kid wants to confide something.
The whole point of this ideology is to get rid of safeguarding.
2319inprogress · 25/09/2021 10:23

Good - more sunlight

The safeguarding & right to a family life failure of this guidance is horrifying. OTOH as I remember it teachers raised objections to Named Person & the bloody SNP forced it through anyway.

“The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get to the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world .” (UK Supreme Court judgment, 2015.)

Tibtom · 25/09/2021 10:12

If school did this with any of my children then I absolutely would take them to court.

Wellthatsit · 25/09/2021 10:06

Surely this contradicts the usual safeguarding guidance that we must never promise to keep something secret when a kid wants to confide something.