Advice: schools socially transitioning children without parental knowledge or consent.

[Libby55]

Hi,

The school I work in is socially transitioning children by changing their names and pronouns without informing parents. Adults working in school are supposed to keep this a secret when communicating with parents. I believe this is a safeguarding issue and that the school is harming children. This is something I know little about and I'm asking for help because I'm looking for an organisation that specifically campaigns against schools harming children in this way. My colleagues share my concerns but are afraid to raise their concerns. My union seems to have adopted gender identity politics. I have to do something: I can see children being harmed. If any of you know of a teacher's group that is lobbying against the practice of socially transitioning children without parents' knowledge or consent, please let me know. I would like to get involved.

ool0n

Safeguarding guidance always transcends every other aspect of guidance in schools. Nobody should be telling adults to keep children's secrets with no reference to safeguarding. That's the route for teachers to be dismissed.
Individual teachers do not have the competence or authority to risk assess an individual child's disclosures. Safeguarding means not working alone - as an individual or as a school. All these decisions are complex and for many children, expressing the wish to transition may not be a safeguarding issue. But a teacher won't know that until they have shared the secret professionally appropriately in line with the school's safeguarding and pastoral care procedures.

Adults who keep a child's secrets are dangerous.

it would be a criminal offence for someone who has been told that someone is trans in the course of their professional role to disclose this information without the consent of the student

It’s a shame you missed off the first part of that sentence, which clearly refers to adult (18+) students with GRCs.

Surely there is a middle ground for schools, they can maintain a child's privacy (not tell their parents) without social transition?

The issue with social transition is that it is a first step to medical transition and the school are supporting it without full knowledge of what is happening in a child's life.

My main concern though is the conspiracy of deception they are encouraging. They must be encouraging other pupils to keep it a secret, and actively deceiving the parents each time there is a parents evening or report card. This does not seem healthy, there must be better ways to support children without encouraging a culture of deception.

The rest of the NEU guidance is indeed shocking though.

In addition to other's excellent post I'll point out something related: when one undergoes safeguarding training at a school, the fact is emphasised several times that you can never ever promise confidentiality to the young person disclosing. And if you don't understand this then you do not understand the basic tenets of safeguarding and child protection.

Ffs autocorrect. Outhere.

@Libby55

Hi,

The school I work in is socially transitioning children by changing their names and pronouns without informing parents. Adults working in school are supposed to keep this a secret when communicating with parents. I believe this is a safeguarding issue and that the school is harming children. This is something I know little about and I'm asking for help because I'm looking for an organisation that specifically campaigns against schools harming children in this way. My colleagues share my concerns but are afraid to raise their concerns. My union seems to have adopted gender identity politics. I have to do something: I can see children being harmed. If any of you know of a teacher's group that is lobbying against the practice of socially transitioning children without parents' knowledge or consent, please let me know. I would like to get involved.

Hi Libby,

I will preface this by saying that I am a teacher, well trained in this topic, and I have many years of experience.

As you say in your opening message, this is something you know little about, so I would advise caution when choosing your sources. At the moment you are looking for confirmation bias, which sources like Safeschools will provide. They are known for an inaccurate and dangerous interpretation of the law, which does not benefit children.

Safeguarding is everything. Safeguaridng prohibits us from outing a child's sexuality or gender identity to their parents, unless one of two criteria is fulfilled:

1. The child gives permission
2. The child's life or safety is at risk as a result of their sexuality or gender identity AND we have no evidence that this is as a result of the parents' ideology.

With regards to #2, it is more likely that a parent will disapprove of the child's gender identity than a change in pronouns will harm the child. I've seen comments such as "if a parent will react badly to a child being transgender, then that is an issue in itself". I have two responses for that. Firstly, we cannot know which parents those will be until after they have found out, at which point it is too late. While women (especially women in their 20s and 30s) are statistically likely to support a transgender child, men aren't. Men in the UK are still more likely to oppose transgender people than women, and that puts children at risk from the reaction of their fathers. Secondly, I think the views that you and I have about the danger of telling parents about a child's sexuality or gender identity have different levels of severity. There are many parents who, unfortunately, would profess themselves to be supportive of trans people but attempt to put their child through conversion therapy to try to make them reject their gender identity. This increases the risk of mental health problems in children. We have to be absolutely certain beyond a doubt that a child will be safe before we share such information, and we don't have the right to arbitrarily make that decision just because the otherwise healthy and happy Daniel would rather use the name Amy.

The Equality Act applies to children, too, and we do not have the right to persistently misgender children, even with parental permission. A child's rights under the Equality Act supercedes the beliefs of their parents.

There are many years of evidence that show that supporting a child's sexuality or gender identity is more likely to lead to a happy adult for that child; similarly, schools that have a positive record of supporting the diversity of their student are more likely to have happy students even in cis/het/neurotypical students, as a result of the more nurturing environment.

I post this with the awareness that there will be many people who disagree with me, and that's fine. I feel it is important to post accurate advise and to provide alternative views, which I've been assured are welcome on Mumsnet.

@Faceicle

In addition to other's excellent post I'll point out something related: when one undergoes safeguarding training at a school, the fact is emphasised several times that you can never ever promise confidentiality to the young person disclosing. And if you don't understand this then you do not understand the basic tenets of safeguarding and child protection.

And the same applies for working with adults too. Terrifying that people want to tear down the basic principles.

Problem is that's not accurate advice.

@HipTightOnions

it would be a criminal offence for someone who has been told that someone is trans in the course of their professional role to disclose this information without the consent of the student

It’s a shame you missed off the first part of that sentence, which clearly refers to adult (18+) students with GRCs.

"In all other cases, the wishes of the pupil or student in respect of disclosure should be respected.

Even when discussing the pupil between staff, the student’s correct and current name (the one they wish to be addressed by) must be used at all times and their gender identity issues should not come into conversation unless it is relevant. If a conversation needs to take place where the pupil’s gender identity does need to be discussed, then it should be done so in a location that is private and confidential. It only takes one overheard conversation to start a chain of events that that can have a detrimental effect on a young person’s transition and early life."

Except it often seems in this forum transphobic parents wishes are paramount, not the kids.

Safeguaridng prohibits us from outing a child's sexuality or gender identity to their parents, unless one of two criteria is fulfilled:

Have you got a reference for that @DaisyJohnson?

@MrsOvertonsWindow

ool0n

Safeguarding guidance always transcends every other aspect of guidance in schools. Nobody should be telling adults to keep children's secrets with no reference to safeguarding. That's the route for teachers to be dismissed.
Individual teachers do not have the competence or authority to risk assess an individual child's disclosures. Safeguarding means not working alone - as an individual or as a school. All these decisions are complex and for many children, expressing the wish to transition may not be a safeguarding issue. But a teacher won't know that until they have shared the secret professionally appropriately in line with the school's safeguarding and pastoral care procedures.

Adults who keep a child's secrets are dangerous.

I didn't say don't share the information, the NEU doesn't say don't share the information. You just don't share it without the kids consent. This should be easy for a supposedly "feminist" group to understand. The kids say their parents are a danger to them if they're outed then you don't out them, ever.

So how should parents be informed that their child wishes to socially transition? Will the school be likely to know enough about circumstances at home to ensure that the subject is raised in the most appropriate manner?

Re. PPs saying that if a school believed that outing a pupil would put them in danger, they would have got involved beforehand. Real life example which happened to someone in my family, some circumstances changed slightly for privacy.

A high-achieving, gifted, neurotypical girl of 15 is going out with another girl in her year. She's outgoing and bright at school, has a small number of close friends, gets excellent marks in assignments and has multiple extra-curricular hobbies (think gymnastics, playing a musical instrument, etc). Her father is a well-known, well-liked member of the local community, a school governor. Mum and Dad have been married twenty years, own their home, have 'good' jobs. Dad says things like 'I would completely support my daughter if she wanted to marry a man of another race or faith'. Mum is generally very quiet, but maybe that's just her personality.

At a parents' evening, a teacher innocently mentions the girl's girlfriend, because she has every reason to believe Dad is a forward-thinking, very tolerant, loving parent who'll support his daughter no matter what. Dad turns the conversation back to her school performance, but shows no 'warning signs' of disapproving.

That night at home, the fifteen-year-old girl is beaten in such a way there'll be no bruises to show. Her internet access is taken away. She's forced to break up with her girlfriend, under orders not to say that the breakup is because Dad's told her to, and she calls her girlfriend while Dad watches, and lies down the phone as instructed. Because Dad has had her and her mother in an iron grip of psychological abuse the girl's whole life, and Mum's whole marriage, she doesn't try to fight back. Mum has no friends left that she can reach out to. The girl won't tell a teacher, because her Dad is so well-known, well-liked, tolerant, friendly and respected in the local community - who would believe her?

Do not be so arrogant or naive as to assume that this sitution is the only time something like this has ever happened, please.

They are known for an inaccurate and dangerous interpretation of the law, which does not benefit children.

You could say the same for mermaids and Stonewall both of whom also like to advise schools, which presumably, you consider reliable sources, based on my interpretation of your comments?

I don't believe for a second an actual teacher would write such claptrap.
I'm an actual teacher. Not just for social media ideology purposes. I have never, ever had a member of staff spout such unsubstituted rubbish.
Safeguarding 101. Follow the correct channels. Don't promise to keep secrets.

I would write anonymously to the governors and say you are a member of staff and are deeply concerned by this practice. If I could, I’d make sure to send directly to a parent governor too because they are likely to be worried by this.

*Safeguarding is everything. Safeguaridng prohibits us from outing a child's sexuality or gender identity to their parents, unless one of two criteria is fulfilled:

1. The child gives permission
2. The child's life or safety is at risk as a result of their sexuality or gender identity AND we have no evidence that this is as a result of the parents' ideology.*

Safeguarding has a legislative basis though, for example children giving informed consent to medical treatment is bound by case law in England and in primary legislation in Scotland. So, given safeguarding is everything I’m assuming you’ll be able to point to primary legislation or case law that states it is legal for schools to withhold information pertaining to a child’s mental, emotional or psychological state, or indeed their gender identity from parents.

You’ll also be able to show evidence that teachers are qualified to diagnose gender dysphoria?

And evidence that teachers are qualified to support children through social transitioning in the absence of the usual MDT that would be in place following a diagnosis?

On the issue of safeguarding from parents, I think we are on deeply worrying ground if schools start assuming parents are a danger to children without any evidence and that institutions are best placed to parent children. One need only look at the care system to know that institutions should be a last resort. For the vast majority of children, their parents are the best people to help them navigate medical issues.

That's just wrong ool0n
Safeguarding doesn't operate on the basis of what information children consent to being shared. The teachers on here actually involved in dealing with safeguarding will be familiar with having to disclose to parents all sorts of difficult / sensitive issues that children are reluctant to tell parents. And there's always discussions about why should it be shared and the risks vs benefits. That's what safeguarding children is about.
Every situation is different / nuanced which is why adults insisting that this group of children must be exempt from fundamental safeguarding principles need challenging.

@RyDry

It is embarrassing that so many teachers and parents feel the need to breach a child’s privacy whilst they take a journey to discover their true identity.

If you plan to out those poor children I mean this in the most impolite way; You are not qualified, nor human enough to be educating children.

And for the out of touch clowns who dare to call themselves “parents” on this thread, instead of worrying about what your child is hiding, have a talk with them. If they are hiding their identities from you there is a reason. And in plenty young transitioning children’s experiences the reasons are a lot closer to home than school.

I sincerely hope those of you who do not understand these issues enough take them seriously, otherwise your child could have a horrific experience of mental health issues as well as the Gender Dysphoria they already struggle with.

It is more than embarrassing to read this sort of nonsense -- true identity, ffs – promulgated as though it had any sort of intellectual credibility. When the foolishness of empty-headed know-nothings such as this is advanced in ways, as here, determined to encourage abuse of children by sidestepping safeguarding rules, there is no excuse; it is plain immoral.

You have the effrontery, RyDry, to write of ‘sincerely ... understand[ing] these issues’ , when you have no inkling of your own stupidity and, we must assume, no inclination to remedy your lack of cognitive grasp. True identity, indeed.

OK this is only the internet. We should not be drawn to anger. We must hope you, and those of your ilk, are kept sufficiently far from children.

But “clowns who dare to call themselves parents” , indeed. And "not qualified, nor human enough to be educating children" . Chutzpah ? This is simply disgusting.

It needs to be remembered that changing name and pronouns and getting medical interventions are two totally different things. As the law currently stands, someone under 18 can’t get any medical intervention without parental consent. Therefore, any argument that claims a teacher should tell a parent that a pupil wants to change name / pronouns on the school register because they “might get medical interventions” is nul and void.

I didn't say don't share the information, the NEU doesn't say don't share the information. You just don't share it without the kids consent. This should be easy for a supposedly "feminist" group to understand. The kids say their parents are a danger to them if they're outed then you don't out them, ever.

If a child's parents are considered to be a danger to that child, isn't that alone a safeguarding concern, regardless of any issues about gender identity?

As the law stands a person can’t be considered to have legally reassigned their gender until they have a GRC, at 18, but parents are being expected to allow their children to share private space with members of the opposite sex, including dormitory accommodation, with no thought to the risk it poses all of the children concerned. To say there aren’t safeguarding issues involved in withholding this information from parents is indeed nul and void.

Surely if a child told a teacher that their parents were a danger to them for any reason that is a disclosure that should be brought to the attention of the safeguarding lead, at a minimum?

It can't be both that the parents are a danger (so don't tell anyone) and the children aren't in danger (so don't tell anyone).