Let’s talk about how safeguarding is being disregarded

[HavingALittleBabyToolshed]

It seems like safeguarding is being thrown out the window in favour of gender ideology.
Many of us on this site work in social care, teaching, health care and similar professions where we are well versed in safeguarding principles. Many of us struggle to see such a core framework thrown out in favour of protecting feelings.

Perhaps we should go through point by point and provide evidence of how and why safeguarding principles, procedures and practices are being thwarted and broken down?

Safeguarding children
www.gov.uk/topic/schools-colleges-childrens-services/safeguarding-children

Can I ask a question please? I don’t work in a field that gives me any experience of this stuff, so I’m not sure if I’m being slow on the uptake or putting 2 and 2 together and making 5.

Father A is a nasty, manipulative bastard, who grooms Child B, including telling him that they are really girls and it’s their secret and Mummy mustn’t find out about their special girl games.
Child B is too scared to tell his mother, but at school he gets very upset and asks to be called Barbie instead of Ben because he is really a girl.
Teacher C is legally prevented from asking Child B any questions about why he feels that way, or discussing any concerns with Mother D.
Mother is completely powerless to do anything because none of the professionals around them will do anything other than unquestioningly affirm that Barbie is a girl, and that in fact A is the responsible and supportive parent because he is accepting Barbie’s true identity?

In theory could this happen?

Doobigetta

Exactly so. A scenario which has the potential to happen.

Yes. As a childcare professional, you'd want to be able to ask the question why has this child started identifying as the opposite sex?

Doobigetta

Safeguarding guidelines always take precedence - always. That's why it's so shocking that trans lobby groups are trying to overturn this.
No school should ever allow an individual teacher to keep this type of confidence. The teacher should share the information with the safeguarding lead (in line with the school's safeguarding policy). Then a decision would be made about how to manage the information and talking with the child / parents. It may not be that teacher's responsibility to follow it up.

However, if trans activists have their way, no one should question a child about their decision and schools should keep secrets about children from their parents so you are right to be concerned.

This is worth reading - it's a court judgement that lays out the dangers to children when trans ideologies take over from basic safeguarding knowledge. This primary child had an (evidently ill) mother who was determined that her son was in fact a girl Some professionals listened only to her and to Mermaids who got involved. As a result, this child was subject to emotional abuse for years until the case finally ended up in court and he was removed from her care and returned to his father. The judge is so critical of social workers who swallowed the trans line and as a result failed to protect the child.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2430.html

That was originally a private case and the first report was written by someone newly qualified, as often happens in private law cases.
At some stage the threshold was met for public law proceedings. I don't know if the trans aspect was part of the threshold.

The judge evidently had a view that unthinking adherence to the "trans ideology" was a major factor in this child being emotionally abused with social services et al failing to protect him.

.

Interesting reading. I hope that is the kind of approach the courts would still take- things have changed even in the last couple of years, it seems.

So Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy is generally considered a red flag for child protection intervention? Yet if that MSBP takes the form of transing the child, social services and other child welfare professionals must simply affirm that child's status & narrative? Am I reading and interpreting this right? That's a gaping loophole as wide as the Amazon delta.

I hope people really think about this issue. I mean all the right on po-mo live and let live I'm not afraid of a penis people.

There are so many of us who have been waving an enormous red flag for years about what taking trans ideology to its logical conclusion actually means. And this is the sort of thing that was predicted; safeguarding being eroded, children being groomed and abused, links with pedophilia, etc.

And we were told that it never happens, that we are transphobic, that we are on the wrong side of history.

It is time for this to stop. I've been reading the Girl Guides thread and the cavalier approach taken to safeguarding in that organization as a result of trans ideology is eye opening and disgusting.

What are the woke people waiting for in order to reset their moral compass? Surely even they can see the harm inevitable in adopting trans ideology over material reality and imposing that ideology on minors

What are the woke people waiting for in order to reset their moral compass?

Honestly? I think it will take a massive scandal for the people who've publicly embraced this ideology to change their positions. And when that happens they'll pretend that they never advocated for it in the first place, and scream bloody murder at anyone who points out what they were saying a year or two ago.

I don't think the people aggressively parroting the TRA line have a moral compass, is what I'm saying. So a reset in the official line they're taking will only happen when doing so no longer results in headpats and praise.

The Savile case was eye-opening for me in terms of realizing that my assumption that everyone has an inbuilt sense of right and wrong and is upset by the idea of any child being abused was not only incorrect but deeply naive.

With regards points 7-10 and both judges comments on the CAFCASS report, there was a segment on Woman's Hour in recent months in which the close involvement of Stonewall as provider of training for CAFCASS was discussed.
(I haven't managed to find it yet sorry)

I have just completed PREVENT training, and it strikes me that this is actually a form of radicalisation.

With regards to confidentiality and affirmation only, or allowing self-harm in the form of breast binding, it could be interpreted to violate the legally established Teacher's Standards. Page 14 'Personal and Professional Conduct', assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf

Added to all this, for a school setting one could argue that supporting an ideology which one knows is against established facts such as biology is in violation of the Teacher's Standards established by the government.

Guardian article January 2018 'Downgrading minister's role shows children are slipping down the political agenda'

(extract)
"Theresa May’s reshuffle put paid to a children’s minister sitting in the upper echelons of her government. Robert Goodwill was dumped from the post after little more than six months in the post, with the role of minister of state for children and families abolished, and most of its remit passed to the junior minister Nadhim Zahawi, a parliamentary under secretary.

The role of parliamentary under secretary is important. They do vital work in government and often have a wide ranging brief. And I’m sure Zahawi will do his best to make sure children’s issues are heard at the highest level of government.

The move is a setback for children and young people, who now, more than ever, need to know that their needs are taken seriously.

The National Children’s Bureau, with colleagues from Barnardo’s, Unicef, the Children’s Society, NSPCC, the Children’s Rights Alliance for England and others are concerned that the loss of the children’s minister as a full minister of state signals that the role is being deprioritised.

We can’t afford to let the needs of children slip down the political agenda. Only last week, the Local Government Association confirmed the growing crisis engulfing children’s services, with a child being referred to social workers for help every 49 seconds. This increasing demand for support comes at a time when crippling funding cuts are leaving councils with capacity only to help the most urgent of cases. The All Party Parliamentary Group for Children, coordinated by the National Children’s Bureau, recently found through an England-wide survey that 40% of councillors leading on children’s services said that a lack of resources prevented them from meeting their statutory duties." (continues)

www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2018/jan/18/downgrading-ministers-role-children-slipping-down-political-agenda

AngryAttackKittens, I'm afraid that you are very very right. There will be a scandal and then there will be whitewashing. Because that is how these things go. We know because we've seen it before and despite the handwringing that goes on in the aftermath, the fact is that most of those who will be harmed are girls and women so society and those in power don't give a fuck.

Having said that, I think safeguarding is something that the average MNer / parent / normal nonwoke person can get behind. We need a campaign.

Beachcomber and AngryAttackKittens

I agree, sadly, that it will take a scandal to wake people up.

By then, there will be a mountain of things to 'unpick' - and some may not render themselves to unpicking.

What I also know is that the phrase we hear after every, single, fucking child abuse scandal - "This must never happen again" - will be heard again and again.

Because what we do in this country is pretend we care about children (I'm using the loose sense of 'we', obviously) and then centre adults - specifically men - every, single time.

Ooh, look, we must care about children a lot - look how much we raise for 'Children in Need' every year! But, ooh look - penis-holders want to get into spaces where they have unfettered access to children (especially girls) and women - let's let them!

I have just completed PREVENT training, and it strikes me that this is actually a form of radicalisation

Yes. Absolutely

VickyE - the big difference here is that people (particularly, but not exclusively, women) have been saying for some time now that the TRA agenda is harmful to children. This isn't something that with hindsight we can see should have been handled differently. Right here, right now we are saying that established safeguarding policies and practices are being undermined by men with feelings - and everyone in authority who is supposed to be protecting the most vulnerable in society is pretending not to hear

wWat we do in this country is pretend we care about children
''We must care about children a lot - look how much we raise for 'Children in Need' every year! But, ooh look - penis-holders want to get into spaces where they have unfettered access to children (especially girls) and women - let's let them!

It's crazy isn't it?

I would love to see this thread in The Staffroom.

I would like to read more teachers' thoughts on this issue.
O,r maybe someone could post a link to this thread? (if that's not against guidelines)

Mumsnet are doing a Facebook live with NSPCC re safeguarding tomorrow

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_facebook_live/3343961-Facebook-Live-about-talking-to-kids-about-staying-safe-from-abuse-with-NSPCC-Thursday-30-August-12-30pm?pg=1&order=

VickyEadie. Yes, it is incredibly disturbing. It is crystal clear with all the stuff that has been coming out over recent years that there is a significant sector of the population who think, at best, that men sexually abusing children (and women) is "just one of those things", and, at worst, a fucking right they should have.

And these people are adept at garnering the support of the "so open minded my brain has fallen out" crowd. Although as time goes on (Girl Guides, the Green Party, the Labour Party, the Libdems, the Challanors, etc) one can't help thinking that a lot of the woke crowd aren't right on at all they are just giant misogynists.

I agree with Lisa Muggeridge that the trans movement is intentionally and calculatingly dismantling safeguarding. And we need to shine a light on this dangerous and deeply anti-social behaviour. There are a lot of people who still think that the trans movement's actions WRT children and women are accidently "open to abuse". In fact, it would seem to be becoming increasingly clear that those actions are not simply and accidently vulnerable to being exploited by abusers…

(I'm mincing my words slightly in the hope that this will not be deleted.)

Safeguarding has always been an arms race between those tasked with protecting the vulnerable and predators who attempt to gain access. Every single piece of safeguarding best practise and legislation we have is built on a mountain of preventable human suffering and death.
Advocates of self-ID should have the burden of proof thrust upon them to prove how self-ID will not damage existing safeguarding and won’t undermine the sex-based protections in the EA2010. No true Scotsman and “it’ll never happen” won’t cut the fucking mustard. They need to PROVE how self-ID will be effectively policed to prevent predation by men who will be able to assume a legally recognised female identity and gain access to vulnerable women and girls with no legal way for them to be kept out

They also need to prove why "affirming" a child with a possible trans identity requires dissolution of safeguarding protocols (confidential disclosures, parental alienation, involvement of other agencies). These protocols are specifically disregarded in guidance issued by trans lobby groups in schools and they all encourage abuser infiltration. In this aspect of it, the likely abuser is not trans and the likely victim is a child with a possible trans identification.

These idiots are throwing "their own" children under the bus. And they're doing it with funding from the fucking government and some of our biggest charities. It defies belief. And when the inevitable scandal happens, I hope a lot of heads roll.

They also need to prove why "affirming" a child with a possible trans identity requires dissolution of safeguarding protocols (confidential disclosures, parental alienation, involvement of other agencies). These protocols are specifically disregarded in guidance issued by trans lobby groups in schools and they all encourage abuser infiltration. In this aspect of it, the likely abuser is not trans and the likely victim is a child with a possible trans identification.

I just don't understand why when the vulnerablities of children and young people questioning their gender identity are repeated so often by TRAs, that there isn't consideration, concern or care for this.

That then those who are raising these concerns are silenced , smeared etc is mind blowing...