Teacher struck for posting online 'Where I teach the trans kids are untouchable'

@WhosPink nope never. Maybe that's why I didn't take that route. I can't even pretend Father Christmas is real. I don't have a problem with other people doing it though.

I wonder if they will grow up to be unemployable if they assume all their needs will always be met regardless.

@CuriousAlien

"I've never had a job where I felt forced to pretend something was real. I don't know what the psychological effect would be on me."

Seriously? You've never had to go along with transparently fictional corporate bullshit just for an easy life? I have absolutely no problem using "preferred pronouns" (I work for a US multinational so it's rife) despite thinking it's contemptible bollocks. No different to enthusiastically professing my belief in the latest corporate vision statement or the revenue projections that can only be explained by our CFO actually being Super Hans from Peep Show.

Thats a name, not some made up bit of someones personality

The concept of gender is bad enough, its sex stereotyping and hugely regressive but it is just part your personality and interests, nothing more, nothing less. You can call it 'gender' if you want. Its no more important than my stamp collecting identity, there goes Stampy Soupy.

Your pronouns relate to your sex, nothing more, nothing less

Two wrongs don't make a right.

What interests me most is that while some people aren't bothered by using cross sex pronouns, for others it feels like lying, like having to profess faith in a god they don't believe in. There's also a question of whether a person thinks it is harmful to either use cross sex pronouns or to not use them when requested (i.e. so-called misgendering).

I've never had a job where I felt forced to pretend something was real. I don't know what the psychological effect would be on me.

I think an earlier poster summed it up for me by saying the system has to change to be able to accommodate people with differing beliefs in a way which can be said to be supportive of both.

There is a duty to report any breach of safeguarding, which includes breaching social media policy. Would you prefer people to turn a blind eye when a teacher posts a pupil's name on social media?

In my view the school was engaged in a huge safeguarding breach by socially transitioning its pupils, which as Cass has told us, is not a neutral act.

Exactly. It can't have been anonymous if she was identified.

If a student changed their surname from their father's to their mother's, for their own personal reasons, and a teacher refused to use the new surname as they felt strongly that all children should have their father's surname - do you think that would be ok?

We can all have our opinions, but it's basic manners to refer to a person in the way they wish. Genuine mistakes are one thing, but making an effort to use an incorrect name, pronouns etc is just plain rude and not in line with how professionals are expected to behave at work.

There is a duty to report any breach of safeguarding, which includes breaching social media policy. Would you prefer people to turn a blind eye when a teacher posts a pupil's name on social media?

Notwithstanding anything genuinely offensive that she said, 'misgendering' isnt really a thing, its an invented thing.

This. I dont know how old she was but given she was teaching there for 23 years, perhaps she has reached the end of her tether in teaching and with the landscape she is now in in schools, thought she had nothing to lose anymore, didnt want to stay, didnt want to defend herself, accepted the allegations against her, thought 'ok then' and off she goes to a nice little job in B+Q or something.

Interesting to read the TRA report (I note the irony of the three-letter abbreviation for the Teaching Regulation Agency), as I wasn't sure whether she had posted anonymously or not:

"The panel noted that it was not initially clear from the name used for the social media account whether or not this account belonged to Miss Hannan. The panel also noted that these posts had been drawn to the School’s attention by a whistleblower from another school, who had been able to recognise that the posts were made by Miss Hannan as a result of an older and un-related post which revealed her surname."

A better word for "whistleblower" might be "ideologically motivated activist maliciously trying to get a good teacher sacked from her job".

Obviously Hannan was taking a big risk posting that kind of content online, though as it seems no one had realised who she was, or what school she worked at, until someone deliberately decided to out her, then the harm done was minimal to non-existent. I'm not defending her, because I think teachers should be very very careful about what they post online, but let's face it, she was raising very legitimate concerns in those posts.

A friend of mine moved her daughter from one of the All Girls schools in Trafford.

One of the reasons she cited was that it was all Trans Stuff constantly. There were other reasons relating to other children in the family but she commented on it without being aware of how I feel about the subject at all. (We've since had conversations).

So yeah, I wouldn't say I would be surprised if it was a girls school.

Not on social media of course. It would be/was foolish to do that......but teachers do talk to each other and their families about their experiences and views on teaching, on their pupils, on the workings of their school etc

and the pronouns they prefer

Why?

Gosh you're easily misled if you think that the comments here - most of them readily agreeing that the teacher's actions were wrong - 'confirm the quite shocking (to me) transphobia among Mumsnetters.'

It's like arriving in the middle of a discussion about global warming, and most of the posts were
'fossil fuels are a danger to the environment',
with a few saying 'yes but I'd be lost without my car and it runs on petrol'
and one or two saying 'I've had enough of the Green agenda being pushed on us by those Just Stop Oil nutters',
and it confirmed for you the quite shocking fact that Mumsnetters are all in favour of the destruction of humanity through global warming hastened by fossil fuels🙄

You need to have evidence before something is 'confirmed'.

It says it was a “ former colleague” who linked the name she used on the tweets to a previous account , so a bit strange.

To have got to the stage of being struck off implies what?

I worked for a one of the HSC regulators until earlier this year and the fact she wasn’t represented, the fact she didn’t turn up will have given the committee no option other than to strike her off. This really may have had a very different outcome if she’d turned up and shown insight and remorse and if she’d had decent representation to challenge the TRA’s case especially on the points of what it is unacceptable to post of sm and what may fall under freedom of speech etc.

Committees hate cases where registrants are unrepresented because you only get a very one sided viewpoint and that will be reflected in the determination and you know that if you had heard anything from the other side things would very likely be different. It’s obviously the registrants fault because she will have had every opportunity to turn up with a lawyer but there is a reason why people pay 💰💰💰for decent representation because it can seriously affect the outcome of a case especially a case like this which involves speech and belief etc and regulators / committees have already gotten the law wrong on this issue.

It frustrating with these teacher cases that they often don’t appear to be represented. I wonder if that’s because teachers aren’t required to hold indemnity to work like healthcare workers are?

The report is available online, you can just Google the teachers name to find it. It answers some of your questions OP - it was Twitter, under a pseudonym, for example. Someone whistleblew.

98% of the posts on this thread are highly critical of the teacher involved. A tiny number aren't.

Come on guys! Not 100%!! Therefore the whole of Mumsnet is transphobic! Only complete bowing down to the ideology will do!! So close!! But no cigar!!

I'm also less sympathetic to the teacher in that part of her gripe seems to be how unquestioning affirmation makes her own job harder - rather than focusing on the harms to the children.

Like, suck it up. Our job is bloody hard anyway and there's always all sorts of new crap we have to do to add to our workload. Unquestioning transgender affirmation is harmful to children (in my strong opinion), which is a way bigger deal than how hard it makes her job

She was very wrong to air these grievances in a way that could identify her, her school, and especially the pupil.

But I must say I'm sympathetic to her frustration. I've come on mumsnet before with similar frustrations about things that go on at my school in service to transgender ideology, that I believe are not good for the pupils' wellbeing (both the trans identifying ones and their peers). It's deeply frustrating and upsetting.

However, the way I deal with my frustration is by talking to (the few) colleagues I trust about my concerns, and occasionally mentioning it anonymously on mumsnet for opinions and feedback and a reality check. There's just no benefit whatsoever in airing these frustrations online identifiably.

None of this matters though. She slagged off her students, particularly those with additional needs and singled one of them out by identifying them. It doesn't particularly matter why or what drove her to it, you can't do that and expect to keep your job.

Do you think girls schools are the appropriate education setting for pupils who don’t identify as girls but are biologically female?

If no, wouldn’t the best solution be for that child to move to a coed school?

if yes, congratulations! You are a terf.