To raise this?

[IHeartKingThistle]

I'm a secondary school teacher. We have a procedure for reporting and recording safeguarding or wellbeing concerns about students quickly - you put your concern into the secure system and it immediately pings over to the safeguarding leads, who generally action it the same day. All reports stay on the system as long as the child is at our school. I think it's great.

Last year I reported a concern about one of the girls in my Year 7 class (let's call her Ellie). She was picked up at the time and supported. This year she has transitioned and now identifies as male - the attendance register now says, let's say Kenny. That isn't my issue, although the child in question doesn't seem much happier to me (and still doesn't do their homework ).

My issue is this - I went onto the safeguarding system yesterday to report a concern about a different child (sadly, I have to do this a lot) and I scrolled down to see my past posts. The concern I reported last year about Ellie is now recorded as a concern I posted about Kenny. But she was Ellie then.

It's probably been done automatically by the system but this doesn't strike me as right - like erasing the true record of this child. WIBU to raise this with school? Would you?

I don't think I would. They are the same person wearing a different name. If they don't update the name on the system then presumably they don't have a complete record on that child - or they'd have two records. I think having concerns that have been logged in the past follow them even under their new name is probably in the child's best interests - otherwise is there a risk that the pre-name change concerns are forgotten, and the extent of any issues understated?

I hadn't thought of that - yeah we do need a complete picture on record. Still seems odd somehow.

That's all so very similar to the concerns about crimes being wiped / forgotten after transition. Only in this case a child could be hurt if relevant information was not carried forward.

If I were you, and you think Kenny has the same issue as they did as Ellie I would re-report it. But I would also go and have a face to face chat to the safeguarding lead to ask for their advice on this. Highlight the issue obliquely.

I would raise it, I think in an ideal world it would give both names, it's not misgendering the child as the child doesn't see this record and for me it would be about accurate record keeping.

As a child cannot legally transition the birth certificate must be in the birth name, not the chosen name. It's important that everything lines up across education and health services etc, particularly if something is called into question for legal reasons.

I hope this poor child is ok and getting the help that is needed.

Sorry, I got that backwards.

I think your school has this right. The child is being put first, regardless of changes in their life.

Is retrospective editing of a safeguarding record usually considered acceptable? I'd have an issue on that alone, it's not safe practice no matter how virtuous the re editor feels their changes may be. It's a legal record. Has a record been made that someone went into those files and re edited them, with a check made on what was changed?

Surely there should just be a clear note in the record that on this date x child's chosen gender identity and new name became y?

If it remains in the previous name, is there a chance that patterns might be missed? Is it not better to have all incidents recorded in the child's record?

I don't have access to the record as a whole which I think is right. Maybe I will ask if it does state that the name has changed somewhere on that system. I do agree that it's in the child's interests to have everything in one place.

It think it’s right. Otherwise, as soon as the child ‘transition las’ they’re would be a loss of records

My knowledge is a few years out of date now, but it used to be the case that a record was supposed to be a 'book' of the history of involvement, in date order, with major changes in circumstance clearly recorded and flagged where they happened.

This is one of the downsides of everything become electronic: that computer says no if names are different and may not retrieve everything relevant. However that doesn't remove issues about retrospective editing of someone's evidence and record of a situation written at the time, which may always need to be produced as legal evidence. If the issue is the computer system may separate or not recognise the name then that's something the computer system needs updating to include: keeping records clearly linked when a trans child's name or sex marker is changed, to prevent this happening. There may need to be some kind of marker on the record to alert a user to see and read a key note that this child's name and marker changed on x date for x reason (as it is possible it may change again in future,) and child known as x is now known as y.

Likewise if it's simply that if you edit the child's name on the record it then automatically changes all the way through the records this presents a whole lot more issues: not least that the pronouns will now make for a highly confusing read.

This may simply be a feature of the way the database is structured. You may be seeing the main record with current details while there may be held a history of changes showing the change in name (date/prior value).

Would the same thing happen if a child's surname changed?

Its not unherd of for this to happen.