School asking daughter to remove small cross despite religious symbols policy

[FanFckingTastic]

I'm looking for some advice and thoughts!

DD is 15 and at secondary school. She has always worn a small silver cross - at primary school this was never an issue (it was a church school) Up until this point it's not been an issue at secondary school either. The cross is very small and is tucked into her shirt so you would have to be really looking for it in order to see it. She always removes it for PE etc.

Last Monday her head of year saw the cross and asked her to remove it. My daughter replied that it was her cross, and that she didn't want to. She was then approached and asked to remove it every day for the remainder of the week, with increasing threats of sanctions if she didn't comply with the schools 'no jewelry' rule. My daughter kept reiterating that this was her cross, and asked the teacher to speak with me. Finally on Friday I received an email to tell me that my daughter needed to take her cross off.

I completely understand the new jewelry rule but wonder how this sits alongside the responsibility that the school has under the equalities act 2010. In their uniform policy it states that it will 'allow pupils to wear headscarves and other religious or cultural symbols' I would interpret this to include a cross too?

My daughter wears her cross as a sign of her faith and really wants to continue to do this.

Has anyone come across this situation before? If so, what was the solution?

Why? Given that, in some religions, headscarves are compulsory but crosses aren't compulsory for Christians?

Why? The cross falls foul of the no jewellery policy headscarves are not jewellery.

So you know some Christian men who wear crosses or scapulars. None of that means that wearing a cross on a chain is a requirement of the Christian church.

So anyway, just insist she wears her cross, take it further if you have to and if she is up for it. Of course she should wear it.

Ignore all of those who despise Christians on this thread, they literally would not dare say a word about a hijab, which isn't a requirement at all of course in Islam.

Nope, I'm not religious just despite hypocrites who hate Christians and do their best to put the boot in at any time.

Won't be responding to Christian haters, so if I ignore you just know that's why :) YW.

A cross is a well recognised, absolutely societally accepted and completely normal symbol of Christianity. She can wear it, she has a right to wear it, she should wear it.

Oh dear, must try harder. Are you seriously trying to assert that wearing a hijab isn't a religious requirement? And are you seriously trying to assert that wearing cross-shaped piece of jewellery is one?

No grips needed here.

There doesn’t have to be - as a matter of law - a requirement for the impacted behaviour of the affected group. It’s sufficient that they are impacted. Eg multiple examples of workplace policies concerning part-time workers (more likely to be women; no requirement for women to work part-time) being found to be discriminatory on grounds of sex because they adversely impacted women more than than men. Equally, a rule that objectively prohibits jewellery generally could be found to be discriminatory on grounds of religion if it has the effect (object notwithstanding) of preventing someone’s religious expression. There may be a justification such as health and safety that will override the equality concern.

Just like some Muslim women wear a hijab ...

Do you know that some fundamentalist Protestants regard the symbol of the cross as idolatrous or even blasphemous? They consider it falls under the worshipping graven images ban in the Bible. So I'm afraid even actual Christians are not united on crosses being an acceptable symbol of faith.

Only some Muslim women wear hijabs yet it is a right for all of them?

Pope Francis advocated for wearing a cross as a symbol of taking up the cross. While I accept OP hasn't specified with Christian denomination is relevant here I would argue if a Catholic can wear a cross then so too can any other Christian. In case you didn't know a Pope's teaching has value. Far too much for me to write about in a mumsnet post...

You're making things up, aren't you? Can you cite any post on this thread which demonstrates that someone despises or hates Christians?

Can you really not see a difference between a practice that is a requirement in one religion, and a practice that is not a requirement of the Christian religion? As for your insistence that wearing the hijab is not a requirement for Moslems, there are people on here who know a hell of a lot more about it who have said that is incorrect.

In a school that bans all jewellery, why has OP's child got a right to wear jewellery? No-one is preventing her from carrying a cross or wearing one in any other way that complies with uniform rules.

So why would a Catholic be allowed to wear a cross as jewellery in a school with a ban on all jewellery?

Which is where the beauty of religious freedom comes into play. By allowing a pupil to wear her cross there is religious freedom, it is not being forced onto other pupils to wear.

I think it would make for an interesting case were it to go to court. Could go either way. I expect the school would cave long before it got there though.

So why does she have to wear it as jewellery? Why should the school relax its rules for this? Otherwise people could get around the rule on any and every pretext claiming they are expressing their religious views.

I don't see why her right to religious freedom overrules the no jewellery ban. She could carry a small cross of wood or metal in her bag or pocket surely?

No, given that no-one could cite a religious requirement for wearing crosses as jewellery, this sort of challenge wouldn't get past the first permission stage of the process.

Because a court might decide that wearing a cross is an expression of religious freedom as guaranteed under the Equality Act and over rule the school. Of course they may also side with the school and say that wearing a religious symbol in the form of jewellery is not a guaranteed right.

I suspect the school is already on thin ground as they already have a rule saying that wearing symbols of faith is permitted.

By this logic why can a Muslim wear a hijab if it can be described as a headscarf?
I absolutely believe Muslims should be allowed to wear hijabs!
I really don't get the need for a ban anyway. I have worked in a number of schools but never one that banned necklaces. One or two had a rule about how many ear piercings that was it.

Ttere is no ‘first permission stage of the process’ (whatever that means) in civil law. We don’t have a government body deciding what cases can and can’t go to the high court.

But it doesn't impact OP's child. She isn't prevented from expressing her beliefs because there is no requirement in the religious faith that anyone does so by wearing piece of jewellery on a chain. She can express her beliefs in school perfectly easily by carrying a cross around with her, and by wearing one in any other way that is compatible with uniform rules, to say nothing of following the commandments and generally complying with Christian tenets. If she is in a state school, she has the privilege above pupils from other religious faiths of being able to attend regular acts of workship of a Christian character.

Actually, there is. If OP wanted to challenge this rule, she would do so by a claim for judicial review. The first part of that process requires a judge to consider the claim and decide whether to give permission to proceed.

Additionally, if OP has any ideas about getting legal aid in her child's name to cover the costs of any such claim, she would have to convince the Legal Aid Agency that the case stands a reasonable chance of succeeding. Good luck with that.

Those of Sikh faith wear a kara which appears similar to a bangle, not a bracelet. It is one of the 5 K's. If you are going to use it as a comparison at least get the name right.

Because it's a requirement of the religion.

The reasons for banning necklaces are fairly obvious and have been expressed by teachers upthread. They get lost, they get broken, they get stolen, and pupils pull on them as a means of assaulting other pupils.

Er, OP set out the purpose of the enquiry in her first post?

The Equality Act doesn't guarantee expressions of religious freedom, it guarantees equality. Therefore if a school allows necklaces then of course it would breach the Act if it banned the wearing of crosses on necklaces; it doesn't breach the Equality Act if it bans all necklaces and refuses to relax it for the wearing of a religious symbol that isn't a requirement of any religion.

As for allowing other symbols of faith, that doesn't weaken the school's position if it is limited to symbols that are religious requirements and are not jewellery.