Working Group - KCSIE 2026 changes - improve the guidance via the consultation process, promote more responses & more

Ooh yes, good catch! Definitely should include "or staff"

269. When discussing requests with children and their parents/carers, schools and colleges should take time to sensitively explain that supporting any degree of social transition will not include allowing access to toilets, changing rooms or boarding or residential accommodation designated for the opposite sex, and will not include allowing children to join PE classes designated for the opposite sex where there are safety reasons for single-sex PE.

Thoughts: it seems important to explicitly include parents in a conversation of this nature - see suggested addition underlined

Here’s the PE loophole again “where there are safety reasons for single-sex PE.”

Still skimming but jumping in here...

My suggested change in italics.

267. In line with the responsibilities of schools and colleges to adhere to the highest standards of safeguarding for the children and young people in their care, alongside obligations under the School Premises (England) Regulations 2012 and the Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014, schools must not allow pupils or staff into toilets, changing rooms, or boarding or residential accommodation designated for the opposite sex, with no exceptions. Similarly, where schools have implemented single-sex sports as being necessary for safety reasons (or any other legitimate aim), there should be no exceptions and pupils must not be allowed to participate in sports designated for the opposite sex. Colleges should follow the same principles.

Keep up the good work. You're on fire! 🔥🔥🔥

Edited to add some extra words in the sports bit.

268. In relation to other policies, the school or college will need to consider whether the policy will place a child who is questioning their gender (and other gender-questioning children) at a disadvantage relative to other children of the same sex. Schools and colleges should consider this both when developing the policy itself and when considering requests to be exempt from such policies. Where the rule or policy does place a gender-questioning child (and other gender-questioning children) at a disadvantage, the school or college should consider the following:
(1) What are the aims of the policy?
(2) Is there another way of achieving the same aim? Might a policy be adopted or an exception made that still achieves that aim?
(3) What is the impact of the rule, or of making an exception (or not making an exception) on the child themselves and anyone else affected?
The school or college should balance the impact of agreeing the child’s clinician’s request against the impact of refusing their request, taking into account all the relevant factors. This will include taking into account the school or college’s judgment about whether supporting social transition is in both the child’s best interests and the best interests of other children, as above.

Thoughts: what does “taking into account all the relevant factors” mean here? This doesn’t seem clear.

My suggested edits underlined above

267. In line with the responsibilities of schools and colleges to adhere to the highest standards of safeguarding for the children and young people in their care, alongside obligations under the School Premises (England) Regulations 2012 and the Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014, schools must not allow pupils into toilets, changing rooms, or boarding or residential accommodation designated for the opposite sex, with no exceptions. Similarly, where schools have implemented single-sex sports as being necessary for safety reasons, there should be no exceptions and pupils must not be allowed to participate in sports designated for the opposite sex. Colleges should follow the same principles.

Thoughts: tick, good 😀

Not sure whether the "necessary for safety reasons" is a loophole worth closing? My DC not sporty and their school split PE by sex so it's not an issue I've had to give any thought to.

Schools and colleges should comply with obligations under the Equality Act and Human Rights Act when considering requests for support with social transition

My version:

Where a social transition is indicated by a child’s clinicians, schools and colleges should comply with obligations under the Equality Act and Human Rights Act when considering how best to support this

I think the following two pars are OK assuming the earlier edits were made.

264. Schools and colleges should take a very careful approach in relation to social transition. The Cass Review acknowledged that there is a lack of good evidence on the long-term impact of social transition on young people, but it is clear that social transition should be viewed as an active intervention that may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning and longer-term outcomes. Primary schools should exercise particular caution, and we would expect support for full social transition to be agreed very rarely.

265. The Cass Review acknowledges that older children will generally have greater agency to make their own decisions. Maintaining flexibility and keeping children’s options open will help to avoid a child feeling they are under pressure to commit to a potentially irrevocable pathway when they are young.

263. The advice above applies in cases where a child has requested support with social transition. In cases where a child confides in a member of staff about their feelings but does not ask the school or college to make changes to how they are treated, there is no reason to break any confidence unless there is a related safeguarding risk.

Accommodating social transition is an active intervention so schools and colleges should take a very careful approach

I would add: and only support social transition where it has been medically indicated by the child’s clinicians

Thoughts: the correlation of gender questioning children with comorbid mental health issues including depression, anxiety, autism, ADHD and PTSD is well documented. IMO this is a related safeguarding risk and parents should be informed. Furthermore, this doesn’t cover what the member of staff may say in response to a child making such a declaration.

Possibly an additional sentence “The member of staff should strongly encourage the child to discuss their concerns with their parents/carer.”

I’d love to hear others views on this one as it feels less clear cut. What would a school do if they noticed evidence of cutting or if a child confided that they felt really anxious - would a school normally inform parents in these situations? If so then it's a no-brainer, they should do in this type of instance also.

THIS
Transactivists are desperate to cling on to the "parents as a risk to their children if they fail to enthusiastically endorse all aspects of a sex change for their child.
Thinking of all my years working with students with other mental health challenges such as eating disorders, anxiety, self harm, suicidal ideation etc I cannot recall any "advice" or policy being framed as "we work with parents except.....". Doesn't happen.
Yes some of these children may well have abusive / problem parents but that's picked up via safeguarding policy and interagency work around the issues. Specialists advising schools about how to work with these children never suggest not working with parents.

It's a fundamental undermining of working in partnership with parents. Only the courts can remove parental responsibility and it's really important to remove this transactivist dominated demand. Parents can't safeguard their children if they're kept in the dark about these issues.

Sorry for the rant but this fundamental undermining of the parent child dynamic enrages me.

262. Schools and colleges should explore how best to support these conversations, including offering a staff member to be present or to speak to parents or carers on the child’s behalf. However, in the rare circumstances where involving parents or carers would constitute a greater risk to the child than not involving them, the school or college should involve their Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) to determine what action is needed to safeguard the child, before the parents are contacted or any decisions are taken.

Thoughts: Schools should be extremely mindful of creating a triangulation by appearing to support the child “against” their parents. This can be damaging to the child and negatively impact the family dynamic.

The way this paragraph is written implies there are some circumstances where parents would not be involved. I don’t think this is what is meant (I hope it is not) and it should therefore be clarified, perhaps:
“However, In the extremely rare circumstances where the school believes involving parents or carers would constitute a greater risk to the child than not involving them, the school or college should involve their Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) to determine whether child social services should be involved before the parents/carers are contacted. what action is needed to safeguard the child, before the parents are contacted. or any decisions are taken.

Yes, in particular, male teachers asking to be called "Miss".

I think this is inappropriate for several reasons.

• different risk profiles of male and female people
• transwomen have reported being "euphoric" when children call them "Miss" - we know that this can be an aspect of fetish

261. The Cass Review is clear that outcomes for children and adolescents are best if they have a supportive relationship with their families and, in the vast majority of cases, we would expect schools/colleges and parents/carers to work together to establish what is best for the child based on clinical advice from the child’s medical team. Involving a child’s parents/carers will enable schools and colleges to promote a child’s wellbeing and protect them from harm.

Thoughts: I can’t think of any case where parents/carers should not be fully involved. Suggested edits above

Thanks, I will keep going! Your posts are great - really thoughtful and based on experience. If we are going to "be kind" it is genuinely difficult for schools to get this right. We need to help them move from a theoretical discussion where everyone is kind and unicorns lurk under the rainbows in every school to the hard reality of what life is like for our kids. Hearing the thoughts of parents with experience of interacting with schools about the children in question is extremely helpful. This includes dealing with detransition / desistence - I'm glad there is a paragraph on this in the KCSIE draft (haven't read it yet though. I'm sure I will have thoughts!)

I also need to go but have been skim reading. Need to come back for a proper look. Your posts are great. Thank you!

(Bit worried now TBH that I'm inadvertently spamming the thread. Hopefully not. It's good that your posts are taking us back to the content of the guidance)

They're really helpful! Your post as 11.57 is excellent doe reminding schools they're completely unqualified in this area:
"253. In making decisions about supporting social transition, schools and colleges must comply with their distinct but interacting obligations under safeguarding legislation and equality and human rights law, ensuring that any assessment of discrimination is informed by their evaluation of the welfare and best interests of the child and other children.
Thoughts: This should be clarified. “In making decisions about how the school will support a medically indicated social transition in partnership with the child’s medical team and parents …”
Schools should not be making decisions about supporting social transition, they should only follow the instructions of a child’s medical team"

I have to go do other things now. Please let me know if my posts are helpful for sparking debate or just spamming the thread! I can keep going if helpful but don't want to be tedious 😬

259. Schools should keep in mind the emphasis in the Cass Review on early clinical involvement when families are considering social transition for pre-pubertal children, including how to support their children in a non-directive way, whilst also keeping options open and flexible. The Cass Review emphasised that clinical involvement in the decision-making process should include advising on the risks and benefits of social transition as a planned intervention, referencing best available evidence. This is not a role that can be undertaken by staff without appropriate clinical training.
Parents and carers should be actively involved and their views treated with importance

Thoughts: Cass also hints at the “vegan cats” phenomena (p164 “It is important to ensure that the voice of the child is heard in any decision making and that parents are not unconsciously influencing the child’s gender expression.”)
The underlined bit should be strengthened. Perhaps as follows:
Due to the inherent safeguarding risks, schools should never support the social transition of primary aged children without the guidance of the child’s clinical team and should always seek the active involvement of parents and carers.

258. Schools should be particularly conscious of safeguarding concerns relating to primary aged children. For example, the Cass Review noted evidence that children who socially transition before puberty – and those who transition prior to receiving clinical advice – are more likely to proceed to a medical pathway than those who do not. Schools should also keep in mind that some children who socially transition before puberty will be “living in stealth” meaning other pupils and/or staff may be unaware of their biological sex, and schools should be aware of related safeguarding concerns as in the section below on living in stealth.

Thoughts: Schools should be particularly conscious of safeguarding concerns relating to primary aged children and should work in partnership with parents to ensure they access clinical advice before supporting any social transition at school. Schools should not support children to “live in stealth” due to the related safeguarding concerns for the child themselves as well as other children at the school.

These are the relevant passages of <a class="break-all" href="https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20250310143933/cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Cass Review Final Report p164
Children:
• Parents should be encouraged to seek clinical help and advice in deciding how to support a child with gender incongruence and should be prioritised on the waiting list for early consultation on this issue.
• Clinical involvement in the decision-making process should include advising on the risks and benefits of social transition as a planned intervention, referencing best available evidence. This is not a role that can be taken by staff without appropriate clinical training.
• It is important to ensure that the voice of the child is heard in any decision making and that parents are not unconsciously influencing the child’s gender expression.
• For those going down a social transition pathway, maintaining flexibility and keeping options open by helping the child to understand their body as well as their feelings is likely to be advantageous. Partial rather than full transition may be a way of ensuring flexibility, particularly given the MPRG report which highlighted that being in stealth from early childhood may add to the stress of impending puberty and the sense of urgency to enter a medical
Adolescents:
• For adolescents, exploration is a normal process, and rigid binary gender stereotypes can be unhelpful. Many adolescents will go through a period of gender non-conformity in terms of hairstyle, make-up, clothing and behaviours. They also have greater agency in how they present themselves and their decision-making.
• For those considering full social transition, the current long waiting lists make it unlikely that a formal clinical assessment will be available in a timely manner. However, it is important to try and ensure that those already actively involved in their welfare (parents/carers, any involved clinical staff such as their GP, school staff or counsellors) provide support in decision making and plans to ensure that the young person is protected from bullying and has a trusted source of support.

Impacts of stealth:
Cass Review Final Report p159
12.12 The MPRG [Multi Professional Review Group] is concerned that some children living in stealth have a common, genuine fear of “being found out”, suffering rejection either due to not having taken friends into their confidence (withholding personal information regarding biological sex or specific sex-based experiences), or due to transprejudice or transphobia. They observed that this fear of “being found out” is driving a sense of urgency to access puberty blockers, which may not allow consideration of other pros and cons of the treatment.
12.13 The MPRG also observed that living in stealth appears to increase a child’s level of stress and anxiety with resultant behaviour and mental health problems. These included social withdrawal, with children becoming increasingly isolated, including resorting to home-schooling or tutoring and even rarely leaving their house.

There’s two male designers from America whose names crop up for inclusive design in school toilets over there and here. I have read their back catalogue of work to see how they came up with the similar designs we see in schools.This person’s work (with less explicit language) was also used as an evidence reference for consultations in Document T (in England).

https://aaa.org.hk/en/like-a-fever/like-a-fever/on-stalling-and-turning-a-wayward-genealogy-for-a-binary-abolitionist-public-toilet-project

I want the civil servants to read this link and see where the background of health and safety for everyone comes into it. I don’t think people are reading references on the origins of newer designs. I think they see the phrase ‘inclusive design’ and it sounds kind and inoffensive.

I want everyone to have the safest toilets possible. Mixed sex, private designs, you can get into easily from the outside, are least worse for healthy men. In the article above there are such designs as one-way door mirrors for a man to look out of (into the mixed sex wash basin and ‘grooming’ areas), whilst he is sitting down in his enclosed toilet cubicle. What girl wouldn’t want that?!

257. As below, in the vast majority of cases we would expect the school or college to work with parents to determine what is in the best interests of the child as well as considering any clinical evidence or advice and seeking any additional nonclinical professional advice where relevant (for example the SENCO), including involving the DSL. Schools and colleges should consider everything that could be affecting a child, including whether they have any wider health issues or neurodiversity. In considering the best interests of children, schools and colleges should also take into account the principle below on taking a careful approach.

Thoughts: edit to put the emphasis in the right place

257. As below, in the vast majority of cases we would expect the school or college to work with parents to determine what is in the best interests of the child as well as considering any the clinical evidence or advice and seeking any additional nonclinical professional advice where relevant (for example the SENCO), including involving the DSL. Schools and colleges should consider everything that could be affecting a child, including whether they have any wider health issues or neurodiversity. In considering the best interests of children, schools and colleges should also take into account the principle below on taking a careful approach.

What worries me about wrong sex pronouns for adults is the safeguarding aspect. I really worry about children being taught/being expected/being shown an example of referring to someone they know is a man, by she/her pronouns.

Extreme example but 'Miss X got really cross with us today because she said we were taking too long in the showers after swimming, and she came right into the shower area so her skirt got all wet'

if I hear that from my daughter, I take a very different message to

'Mr X got really cross with us today because he said we were taking too long in the showers after swimming, and he came right into the shower area so his skirt got all wet'.

It is a very nuanced message to get across to a child that they should use she when it doesn't matter (eg she asked where my book was and I said it was at home) but he where it does matter (he put his hand on my shoulder and I didn't like it).

256. This means that the first step when considering a child’s request for support with social transition will be to consider what is in the best interests of the child and other children, and a decision relating to social transition may not be the same as a child’s wishes.

Thoughts: Ibid! This implies that the school will decide whether to support a request for social transition and how it will do so.

Suggested alternative: “The first step when considering how the school can support the medically indicated social transition plan from the child’s clinical team, will be to consider how the transitioning child’s needs may impact other children. Practical support must be offered in a way that is in the best interests of both the transitioning child and other children.”

Schools and colleges should surely liaise with parents if any concerns about the safety of children arises?

It does worry me that the guidance explicitly says that a child expressing gender confusion to a teacher can be held in confidence rather than treated as a safeguarding issue in and of itself. Given that gender issues seem to be a red flag for mental health issues I think it should be required to be recorded on CPOMs or similar.

Toilets that were large single sex rooms with cubicles were also not safe.

They are safer and even safer still if they have door gaps. The designs can be life changing.

Toilet designs are not equal. Single sex designs in a single sex environment can have door and partition gaps. Door and partitions gaps, as standards said at the time of 1992 legislation, were advantageous for ventilation, cleaning, prevention of misuse and supervision.

None of advantages have changed over time.

Take supervision for example. In order to rescue a pupil in time, you need to:

1. know they are in trouble,
2. to be able to get to them
3. and have means to give them medical treatment/resuscitate them.

There is so much emphasis put on 2 and 3. Toilet cubicle doors have to be able to be unlocked easily from the outside and the doors changed to open outwards so a body doesn’t get in the way. Defibrillators are in every school. There’s a whole raft of measures for storing and giving the correct medicines.

I can give you evidence if you want on how design matters. I have a 90 page report (30 pages of references and incidents) I am trying to edit at the moment. This isn’t just on schools but schools are featured heavily as they were never under so much health and safety legislation as workplaces, so it was more of a free for all. Train carriage toilets and night club toilets are featured a lot too - unisex ones usually. And it’s young women who are mostly affected.

edit to add: 1992 legislation didn’t apply to pupils in schools or students in universities

Yes, teachers barely have time to teach. It would be very difficult for them to take anything but a very superficial interest in a child’s thoughts, and they would be unlikely to have any but the most superficial understanding of their needs.

Also the examples cited, ( ’for example relating to relationships with family, peers or their broader social environment, including discriminatory bullying’) are very selective, with no mention of the well documented underlying other problems often faced by gender questioning children.