Parents kept in the dark by teachers about their 16 year old daughter’s medical transition

Imagine for a second we are talking about literally anything other than trans issues. If we were talking about abortion, contraceptives, sti medication, vaccines etc I really doubt many people here would be arguing that schools have a duty to inform parents that a child has received treatment from a doctor.

But that's not equivalent, is it? Because all of those are recognised treatments with known risks and benefits which can (potentially)be understood by the child; not unresearched uses of drugs which were never intended to be used in this way and which UK courts have said under 18s are not capable of consenting to. This is more like an anorexic getting prescribed wegovy, or an anxious over achiever being prescribed amphetamines for their exams, and school staff knowing and even facilitating that, against the express wishes of the parents and the instructions of the SLT.

I hope the parents take the individuals involved in this safeguarding failure to court.

The school leadership team agreed with the parents that this vulnerable autistic child should not socially transition at school. However a small group of teachers, friends and the LGBT club covertly transitioned this girl. There was a note on her file to conceal this from the parents. The local LGBT club put the child in touch with dodgy NHS GP, not the family doctor, to dole out cross sex hormones.

That this family has the strength to go to the papers while dealing an utter nightmare, is truly a public service.

I am grateful to parents like these who are fighting back and shining a light. There are numerous cases like this one.

Parental responsibility does not extend to knowing a child's full medical records if that child has been deemed competent to consent by a doctor (I've attached a photo of the relevant NHS page). Children are not wholly owned by their parents, and have a right to privacy (if they are competent to make the relevant decisions). Schools must not be overriding the medical professionals regarding competence because teachers do not have the expertise in this.

Imagine for a second we are talking about literally anything other than trans issues. If we were talking about abortion, contraceptives, sti medication, vaccines etc I really doubt many people here would be arguing that schools have a duty to inform parents that a child has received treatment from a doctor.

The problem is that doctors are prescribing treatments which are wholly unacceptable for children. Dr Cass' report helps but I think we need far stronger guidance or legislation on this so that doctors who inappropriately prescribe these drugs are stuck off immediately.

However, when it comes to non-prescribed things (eg binders) I'd argue that schools do have a responsibility to inform parents. Because they are harmful and no medical professional has deemed the child competent to make the decision. In that case schools should be deferring to parents.

Thank you, you said what I wanted to say.

Parental responsibility must not be usurped by school, no matter how right they think they are (or how wrong they think parents are). This was a child, because this obviously started before age 16, and one with additional needs at that.

And who will be left to deal with the fall out? Not the teachers, youth workers or whoever, who get to bask in the glow of their own righteousness in affirming this young persons true self. But the parents, trying to deal with a vulnerable young person who has been enabled in self harming behaviour by adults they all should have been able to trust.

My apologies for assuming you were an activist. The focus on alienating children from their parents is a theme that runs through most of the material developed for schools by trans activist groups with countless politicians and activists positioning parents as trans / homophobic and children needing protection from them. In fact safeguarding legislation is clear that everyone must work in partnership with parents (even abusive ones) and that removing parental rights is an incredibly serious step that must be done through the courts.
We're past the stage of giving schools and social workers a free pass because they're good people I'm afraid (and I've taught in 4 different schools & worked with countless others). Too many schools are engaged in an untested social experiment on children that they have no training or competence in. They have shamefully breached the statutory guidance on political impartiality by allying with extreme queer theory activist groups & allowing them to influence school policy and practice in a manner that is causing psychological harm to the children involved and the remaining children compelled to validate their mental fragility.

And safeguarding children explicitly extends to children over 16 if there are concerns about their ability to consent (ie SEN etc)

See it's just so muddy. A clear timeliness would help. I am sure this will now be fully investigated- I am withholding judgment (except for the Dr prescribing outside NICE).

But if they thought disclosing would place the child at risk of harm (I would suggest self-harm here) then that is a valid reason for not sharing concerns with the parents.
TBF they did refer to social services.

The problem with regulating doctors is that whether a doctor's actions are considered reasonable is based partly on whether a lot of other doctors would have done the same thing. My understanding of the Helen Webberley case was that she wasn't struck off because she could argue that she was following treatment protocols used by lots of 'expert' doctors.

If one doctor 'goes rogue', its quite easy to deal with them. When its a significant proportion of the profession, all for some incomprehensible reason believing in this nonsense, but who are running the gender clinics, writing international guidelines, and influencing the bodies that regulate doctors, it's a lot more difficult.

Can anyone explain where the parents now stand? Can they sue the school & involved?

You cannot disclose medical information about someone without their explicit consent I'd they have capacity. Capacity is nor binary it isn't something that you magically acquire on your 16th birthday. Information sharing needs to be proportionate. Perhaps they felt by sharing this information it would negatively impact on the young person's mental health and/ or their relationship with their parents ? Do we know these were definitely prescribed before their 16th Birthday ?

And the GMC

Please help me to understand how concealing that an under 16 is taking powerful medication off label without their parents knowledge is safeguarding that child? Cos I'm not seeing it.

It was medically prescribed. It is not the job of teachers or social workers to make medical decisions. A 16 year old with medics is where the decisions lie. And beyond that the NHS, NICE and parliament

Venal grade political power, and gains in personal status.

https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1671726201323307008?cxt=HHwWgIC2-e6HlbMuAAAA

I think removing music, sunsets and all that is beautiful whilst in prison, from those who induced illness in children, that their victims can never experience - based on fabrications, should help rehabilitation.

If you are too stupid or inept to do your job properly then you need to find alternative employment, safeguarding is part of DBS employment.

The child in question was vulnerable due to her autism. Had she others working with her in school due to this? How could a team of professionals make a call on a child without parents being consulted & why did they do it?

While most GPs wouldn't dream of prescribing cross sex hormones to a child, unfortunately some are true believers in gender ideology.

I remember Adrian Harrop, for example, tweeting about how he had initiated testosterone treatment for a young woman. Not a child, but still a treatment with unknown long term complications, but likely including sterility. Started by a doctor without specialist qualifications in either psychiatry or endocrinology.

Look I am going ro step away from this now. But schools and social workers are absolutely key in safeguarding, in those cases they absolutely do know better than the parents. Unless anyone on this thread knows the family concerned, we don't know if there were legitimate reasons for these professionals not to share information with the parents or not. I'm not calling it either way.

I think we should blame the school and social workers. 'They were doing what they thought was right' isn't a defence, who were they to decide they knew better than the parents? When the parents were following recommended best practice? I'll give them some leeway for having been brainwashed trained by the usual suspects but seriously, who do they think they are to try to usurp parental responsibility?

16 year olds are allowed medical autonomy. You do not own your children.

Whats also interesting is the demographics involved. Schools receive guidence on what students to look out fir with regards to things like arranged marriages , fgm, breast ironing, online grooming . Yet somehow removing sexual function, disrupting mental and physical development, damaging breasts with binders akd discussing sexualities with teachers in lgbt groups is waved on through. Why? Whats the difference 🤔

I'm not an activist far from it, my 16yo frequently describes me as transphobic and I was told I was gender critical at work. What I try to be is balanced and measured. FWiW I don't think the child in the article should have been prescribed hormones, but I don't blame the school or the social workers who were all almost certainly trying to do their best. The ethics and the law are extremely muddied around this issue. There is no right and wrong.