Facebook Live about talking to kids about staying safe from abuse with NSPCC

[RachelMumsnet]

We’re running a facebook live with NSPCC about talking to kids about staying safe from abuse. The NSPCC have developed programme called Speak out. Stay safe delivered in primary schools across the UK. Volunteers visit schools where they run workshops and assemblies to teach children how to stay safe from abuse and what to do if they have any concerns. The NSPCC are also running a campaign called PANTS that teaches parents how to talk to young children about staying safe from sexual abuse in an age appropriate and non-scary way.

Lidl say: "'Last year Lidl UK employees voted to make the NSPCC their new national charity partner for a three year period. During this period, this partnership will aim to raise £3 million to keep 1 million primary school children safe through the NSPCC’s Speak out. Stay safe programme. This vital programme helps to empower a generation of children with the knowledge they need to stay safe. With at least 2 children in the average primary school class having suffered abuse or neglect, it’s vital that the NSPCC has the resources to visit primary schools across the UK to teach children that abuse is never OK."

Join the NSPCC live next week on Thursday 30 August at 12.30pm on Mumsnet Facebook or post up a question on this thread that we will put to the NSPCC during the live stream. We’ll link to the stream next week on this thread.

SistersofMercy MN does not allow hate speech. Please report any such and it will be deleted.

NSPCC - you have an outstanding track record in safeguarding children. I beg you to read the concerns here and give a full response to them. I beg you.

So I'll finish by apologising to the NSPCC for their treatment here, thank them for all their work in protecting vulnerable children, and donate £50 to them by way of compensating for this shit show.

Tbf you were finished before you even started sweetheart. If you had any actual arguments we'd have heard them by now.

Here are all the biscuits. Which is your favourite @NSPCC?

NSPCC, this is appalling. Genuine concerns have been raised and you have told us that they don't merit a response. That is utter bullshit and I suspect that you know it. Not a penny more will you get from anyone in our family.

I think it's worth pointing out that this is Mumsnet. This is the biggest parenting site in the UK. We haven't changed. I've been here for years. I know lots of others on this thread have too. We're still capable of discussing the bakery section in Lidl and whether Bounty should be on maternity wards, we like a parking thread and a Bridezilla, we put silly hats on our emojis at Christmas, we give earnest feedback on buggies. We are those women.

But clearly you can't come and talk to us right now if you're involved in safeguarding in this country unless you have proper answers to these concerns of ours. Answers that aren't 'we don't have any concerns'.

So I'll say it again. We are the biggest audience of parents in the country. We are DESPERATELY concerned about this topic. We are asking for a discussion. And if you can recognise that as something that should give you pause you shouldn't be involved in safeguarding anything.

Oh good lord.

*Let me think, definitely need a PhD in maths to work this one out ...

1. 51% of the population
2. 0.1% of the population*

^this was sisters response to how can trans peolet's affect women's rights.

There are 14,000 men in prison for sex offences and 120 women.

Every single one of those men can identify as a woman in order to get an easier ride, or access to women.

With self ID, they can all bloody do it overnight.

Fool.

We are the biggest audience of parents in the country. We are DESPERATELY concerned about this topic. We are asking for a discussion.

Yes.

Also, going back to the PANTS rule - which is a good rule, and very easy to explain in an age appropriate way - the T stands for "talk about what's worrying you." It recognises that encouraging children to keep secrets is a massive no-no when it comes to effective safeguarding.

Yet the "affirmation only" guidelines organisations like GIRES and Mermaids are pushing in schools suggests that if a child discloses they are trans, this should be treated in the strictest confidence - i.e. the complete opposite of the "talk about it" rule. No-one gets told - not other teachers, not parents, not health care professionals. The one adult the child disclosed to becomes "holder of the secret." Which has the potential to go spectacularly tits-up if that adult is not trustworthy.

That's not transphobia, that's simply pointing out that a particular approach to supposedly "supporting" children who are expressing discomfort about the gender roles they are expected to fit into by society runs roughshod over good safeguarding practices, and suggesting that there has to be a better way of supporting these children.

To say I am shocked and disgusted at the NSPCC statement is a massive understatement. Why is nobody listening? I am all in support of inclusiveness and tolerance but not at the expense of the safeguarding of young people.

NSPCC you should be ashamed of yourselves. You need to reconsider who is advising you on these matters.

Oh we do know, that is the point.

Still, NSPCC say 'no problem', so that is all ok then.

What frightens me the most is that the NSPCC is THE children's charity and where they lead, everyone else will follow. It's the only charity to have statutory powers under the Children's Act.

If the NSPCC thinks that our concerns are unfounded, then let's talk about it and see the evidence.

No one here is being transphobic. We are concerned about the safety and well-being of all children. Children are of one sex or the other, regardless of their sense (or absence) of gender identity. We take sex into consideration for other children (or will the NSPCC also be changing its guidance around mixed sex siblings sharing bedrooms?), not because we think all boys or all girls are a threat to each other, but because there is a small risk which must be mitigated. Gender dysphoria is a terrible thing but a desire to transition doesn't change one's sex and doesn't mitigate that small risk that's present in any mixed sex group.

Right now, this just feels like grooming. 14 year old transgirl that you've known as a boy for the past 13.5 years is sharing your daughter's guide tent, without yours or her prior knowledge or permission? Your daughter is a transphobic bigot if she's embarrassed by this and needs re-educating. She can ask her leader for different accommodation if she feels brave enough and can face the potential shunning. Or she can put up with it and learn that her boundaries aren't that important. How did we get here?

@SistersOfMercy

If the majority of posters here are wrong about their concerns, then why don't you try and answer to some of the issues that we have highlighted?

Why not try and educate us rather than call us names?

Because you are t doing the self-I'd cause any favours by insulting people.

I'd love to know one example of how trans inclusive policies are protecting girls.

"Children’s early experiences have a significant impact on their development and future life chances. As a result of their experiences both before and during care, looked after children are at greater risk than their peers."

NSPCC's role with regards children in care:
www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-protection-system/children-in-care/

It would be interesting to know if they have made an assesment of the resources for children and young people in care and the toolkit for professionals and foster carers linked in the thread below:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3324578-Vunerabilities-of-Looked-After-Children-Social-Work-CP-restricted-by-affirmation-requirement-Trans-Youth-in-Care-Toolkit

And I never thought I'd say this, but I hope that the Daily Mail DO lift this thread and make a story on it.

Has anyone sent it to them yet?

Me too SPOFS

So I'll finish by...

Oh sweetie, you never even got started.

The NSPCC admitted to me in personal correspondence that they have "limited expertise within the organisation in regards to these issues" and so they "do not feel that [they] can take an organisational position at this time."

Except this admission of ignorance has not stopped them at all from taking an organisational position at this time, an organisational position that they had already held for several years, of hosting trans-ideological, evidence-free, dangerous nonsense "advice" on their "transgender" Childline page. "Advice" that specifically puts girls in danger and furthermore tells them that they are wrong to consider themselves in danger and it would be bullying others if these abused girls asserted their boundaries. When it's fucking Childline telling abused girls that, where the fuck can girls go for help?

I had been financially supporting them for decades. I no longer have a direct debit supporting them, as you might imagine. They are also no longer in my will.

Tbf you were finished before you even started sweetheart. If you had any actual arguments we'd have heard them by now.

This. Pathetically transparent.

Trans young people are at particular risk of physical, sexual and emotional abuse from peers.

Really? More at risk than girls? Where is the evidence for that statement please? 1 in 3 girls is sexually assaulted at schools and I read recently (I don't know how accurate this is) that one rape a day is being committed by boys against girls in schools. I really hope that's not true, but if it is, it would appear that trans young people are not at any more particular risk of abuse from their peers, than are girls.

Unless of course, you think abuse is only abuse if it's suffered by people who are not girls.

Your cowardice and dishonesty is staggering. I am so glad my kids are growing up and don't need to rely on the NSPCC to be safe, and I hope by the time I have grandchildren, if I have grandchildren, this madness will be over and the NSPCC will have been replaced by an organisation which has the guts to withstand social fads and stand up for children's safety and welfare.

Tbf you were finished before you even started sweetheart. If you had any actual arguments we'd have heard them by now.

This. Pathetically transparent.

LOL so true it had to be said twice.

Are we the baddies?

Nah.

This is more like are we all Winston fucking Smith?