Secondary School complaint about mixed sex changing rooms. Update, school response and request for help writing the escalated complaint to governors

@Keeptoiletssafei thought you might appreciate that bit!

@2fallsfromSSA
😭❤️❤️❤️❤️

Thank you. I got to the bit about toilet door gaps and burst out crying! I have made myself a cup of tea. Calmed down, and carried on reading.

This will have the potential to save lives and prevent assaults. That’s not an exaggeration. It will also mean that parents of children with invisible disabilities or mental health issues will feel less worried about sending their children to school because the toilet design is (literally) less of a barrier to keeping them safe in education.

Thank you so much.

@TangenitalContrivance our statement should help you with your response. It just reiterates that schools should have always been prioritising SG and the SC judgement clarifies this:

https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2025/04/19/supreme-court-child-safeguarding/

If I recall, the reply from your school quoted policy that said something along the lines of lesbian, gay and bisexual students should not pose any risk. Whatever else you write, I think it would be worthwhile making clear that (a) lesbian, gay and bisexual students are traditionally housed in their correct-same-sex accommodation so do not have anything to do with your complaint (and to suggest they do is offensive), and (b) they didn’t include any assessment of risk from transgender students (who are different from LGB students by dint of wanting to be housed in opposite-sex accommodation) in their reply to you.

I would directly quote the 3 Supreme Court sentences about changing rooms. Then I would highlight the person/people who is/are responsible when you take it further (which you will) and they have to justify why they are going against the supreme court. From my previous DfE post on this thread, the DfE make it very clear who is ultimately responsible for safeguarding depending on which type of school it is (it’s never the DfE!).
The DfE have a very easy online complaint form which handily has an option for safeguarding so that indicates they must prioritise those complaints. If you can get in the phrase ‘prudent parent’ that would be useful.

I expect you have done all the above already.

This.
Presumably you're still in the midst of the school complaint procedure so the next step will be governors?
The SC judgement will I'm sure focus minds on the legal fall out from denying girls access to single sex spaces. My guess is that the government will have to stop wibbling and ensure that schools get advice to comply with the law pdq. Phillipson's policy of ignoring all this (no doubt influenced by all her gifts from Stonewall's Lord Ali) won't wash any longer.

I’d just refer to previous correspondence and the SC judgement, maybe quoting what his Lordship said at the beginning that in the Equality Act sex is what matters.

And then say in light of the SC decision you trust they will be changing the policy immediately and if not, will they be taking appropriate legal advice on the matter, and also notifying their insurers?

Sinner: Fowles isn’t a KC and he’s also not a specialist in equality law. Which is presumably why Akua Reindorf was able to pick so many holes in his witterings:

https://x.com/akuareindorf/status/1912800444419617142?s=61

I read several articles in the Graun today, on this subject. My and haven't they gone out of their way to report the actual words of it, whilst detailing why they think it's wrong. Apparently, hardly any transw have had their voices heard...

M. Bergdorf, E. Gomersall, V. McCloud; all had their say. Serious repercussions for transw and Donald Trump were woven into their fairy tale of why the SC is horrid and wrong.

Sam Fowles KC (man) managed to say "c*s" as much as possible, whilst claimthat the SC has muddied the previously Ccrystal clear, simple waters of the GRA 2004 and EA 2010. It's as if he simply identifies as a KC!

He's also cottoned on to whiny trope of the day:

"Boo hoo! No trans voices, not even Retired Judge, V. McCloud, were allowed to be heard!"

As if he didn't know that each side picked their witnesses.

Intrigued to know what the rainbow alphabet lot at the NEU conference this week will come out with….!

I'd imagine that the Graun has responded to a tsunami of complaints about their mean spirited, misleading headline.

Thanks for the confirmation; thought I was going daft there! The start, perhaps, of a lot of reverse-ferretting. When I opened MN this morning and saw the news, and the government's response, my first thought was the "We've always been at war with Eastasia" line, but I soon saw several MNetters had got there before me! 😁

Yes they have changed it. When I read that piece at 10am it was headlined "Critics of equal rights for transgender women..." And when I checked back around 12 it had been changed. It's linked under the live so even though it's an earlier piece it's still prominent on the homepage.

But that's an earlier piece, timed at 5 am this morning, so before the announcement? See they had to get a quote in from Judge Vicky.

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_judgment_aea6c48cee.pdf

@TangenitalContrivance If you click this link and then press the search icon (sorry if I am teaching you to suck eggs) with ‘changing room ’ as the word, it brings up 3 results. Points 211,215,265.

To this?

Gender critical rights campaigners have won their supreme court challenge over the definition of a woman.

They've changed the wording already!? 🤔

From commentary here and there it’s still clear that there will be confusion and deliberate confusion of the law, despite this case, so we all do still need to keep pushing on this.

I hope today's court ruling helps you achieve that.

Me too! Seriously, the women on here can work wonders (have been involved with the NHS single sex spaces audit, so know whereof I speak!) - let us pull some weight.

We are happy to help.