School trip policies on overnight accommodation for trans children

[foodfiend]

Short version:
School's policy appears to be something long the lines that trans girls can share with girls if the girls are OK with it. Dd (14) is proposing sharing a room with trans girl friend and another girl. We have said we're not happy about this. Dd says that's transphobic.

Long time lurker here - would welcome any relevant experience, especially from any secondary teachers. School trip is this spring, planned since Oct - they've now been asked to submit room share preferences - rooms of 3. Dd is friendly with a trans girl - (since before name change ~ 2 years ago). Dd says A told her that the teacher had told A that they could share with whoever they want 'as long as everyone was OK with it'. (I have now checked with the teacher, and this appears to be correct.) Dd and another girl have agreed to share with A.

DH and I both said, hang on, A is male. It is not appropriate for you to be sleeping in mixed sex bedrooms. Dd says A is not male and we are transphobic.

To be clear - the kid seems perfectly nice and I think this scenario would probably be fine. (No idea what the other girl or her parents think.) But a policy of 'yeah, sure, mixed sex sleeping arrangements are fine if everyone agrees to it' sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. And it's unclear whether I'd even know it was happening if I didn't happen to already know that A is trans.

I'm pissed off at being put in this position of having to be the one to point out that this is inappropriate and put a target on my head as 'hateful', or seeming to specifically reject A/A's identity. While Dd professes to be happy/keen on this, it's clear that it would be extremely difficult for a girl in a similar position to say that she wouldn't be happy to share - she'd be terrified of being accused of transphobia. And it seems pretty crummy for A as well to be asked to go round her friends and put them on the spot like this.

It seems like the school is relying on the kids to somehow work it out for them. And that no-one seems to have spotted the obvious risks of setting such a precedent. Will they be equally happy for a trans boy to go in with two boys next time around? Or other male and female students to choose to share mixed bedrooms?

Are any other parents and teachers able to share policies or approaches from their schools?

@CrymeaRvr

Case by case does make sense. That way, all the facts without random speculation and disaster planning for things that aren’t going to happen. Think about the kids involved

Well it's clear you've never done safeguarding training.

Binglebong

Not to derail further, but look up Michel Foucault and Queer Theory. I mean it is relevant to this thread. It is all about destabilising science and established thinking around societal mores. Including some safeguarding protocols.

Sorry. To add. He was obviously mentioned in that article.

Not read the whole thread but the point of 'case by case' is it doesn't relate to the child but the situation. So "Do girls require safeguarding and privacy from boys (however they identify) in sleeping arrangements on an overnight trip?" That is the case to be considered, not what we think of a particular child or the opinion of the girls

That would just male things worse.

Sir...why to believe I.a girl when you do the register but not when we change for PE.

Miss, why does Sarah get to stay with Kat and Lucy on the school trip but I have to stay witg James amd Owen.

Sir sir sir either I'm a girl or I'm.not why are you being a bigot and making me sit in the boys catch up science class.

A firm.No to any of it and they'd know where they all.stood regardless.

I’m starting to think “case by case” means “treat trans kids extra special” to these posters.

Trouble is we treat them all " special " then place them In dangerous situations then when the inevitable happens, somehow instead of taking responsibility for making the demands that lead to the incident incident in the first place, uts eveeyone else's fault fir providing poor health care or not supervising sufficiently etc.

Never ever , is the link.made that maybe if we didn't put them in the situation in the first place it wouldn't happen. Akd on fact the fact it did happen.is then used as emotional.blackmail to make further demands which again lead to dangerous situations which are everyone else fault , lather rinse repeat...

whether the risk is, in part or in whole, outweighed by the risks of not implementing the guidance

I've seen that excellent article before, which comes from a place of actual trained professionals who when safeguarding are not solely considering not even the best interests but the wish list of one specific group and have a really quite alarming disregard for and bias against all other groups of children, particularly the female ones that groups such as Stonewall have modelled.

What are the risks of abandoning all known safeguarding processes to keep male and female children separate while in the care of staff away from home in order to permit a male child to sleep where they wish and with whom they wish?

• female children may be excluded from this trip because they cannot share mixed sex facilities which may be due to disability, trauma, faith, belief or culture, which may leave the school open to action re discrimination and failing to be inclusive of all instead of just the male child (nine characteristics remember, not one)

• risk of emotional coercion to female children to lower boundaries against their consent due to pressure of male child/their peers/staff and putting those female children in the position of feeling forced to put the male child first
• risk of female children having an emotionally threatening and distressing experience on this trip around loss of privacy, dignity, sense of safety and sense of their emotional needs being regarded as equal to a child who is male
• risk of TQ+ male child experiencing stress and distress over whether or not they may be permitted to be with the female children or a female child/parent may say no
• risk of TQ+ male child who female children clearly express a refusal to share a room with quoting previous precedent and enforcing presence regardless of female children's consent with obvious distress, bad feeling and issues for all..... wtf do we do then? (Cancel the trip probably)
• risk of TQ+ male child experiencing an allegation from a female child in the vulnerable position adults let that child get into
• risk of female children experiencing harassment or assault with risk of life time emotional and relational harm
• risk of female child experiencing unwanted sex or even rape with obvious life long emotional, relational, and possibly physical or reproductive harm
• risk of other female children in that room being exposed to sexual experiences that may or may not have gone well, and ending up witnesses with all resulting emotional harm or under pressure to keep secrets for peers to a severity that usual safeguarding strategies would prevent
• risk of female child acquiring an STD while in staff's care
• risk of female child experiencing the extreme risks of a pregnancy and the very major life impact of this upon her and her parents
• risk of said parents suing the living daylights out of everyone concerned
• risk of an OFSTED investigation for failure in duty of care and safeguarding
• risk of Local Authority inquiry including a possible serious case review
• risk of how the fuck this would look on the front page of the Daily Mail (this IS a serious safeguarding 'lets stop and think' check)

All this, balanced against what?

• the risk of a TQ+ male child having to follow standard safeguarding procedures at night for sleeping arrangements, and cope with the disappointment that their sex and not their gender is the deciding factor.

This thread is really depressing.

To place responsibility for adult decisions on to the shoulders of young female pupils then forcing understandably worried parents to take the 'bad guy' role is abhorrent.

All so the school/LEA can wriggle out of their safeguarding duties lest they upset the activist organisations they've no doubt paid to misinterpret and lie about law and policy.

Gender ideology is a complete wrecking ball to all things safeguarding. Eventually we will look back and wonder how on earth this was allowed to happen.

Thanks snoodsy. An excellent précis.

Never fails to be horrible reading .

Not listened to this [[https://twitter.com/widerlenspod/status/1487025925288087558
Wider Lens podcast]] yet (although I'm sure it's as excellent as they always are).

But the displayed quote from psychiatrist Stephen Levine seems relevant here.

One of the first things that I try to say, if it seems at all relevant to a new trans person, is that number one, they're a human being. And what is true about all human beings must be true about them. Yeah, they think of themselves as a special case. And many of the affirmative clinicians think about them as a special case. And I say, 'nope.' You're a human being.

Many would do well to bear that in mind. (Also with respect to women, in the other direction...)

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Further, I question Isaw3ships' implication that experiencing gender dysphoria and being attracted to the opposite sex are mutually exclusive.

Trans people, including adult transwomen, may be solely attracted to the same sex, the opposite sex, and both sexes.

A 14 year old male teenager may be simultaneously genuine when identifying as trans and excited about the romantic possibilities of sharing a room overnight with a female best friend.

It is also quite possible in such situations that the female best friend may be totally unaware that her male best friend (trans or not) has a crush on her, and is unaware that the male teenager has hopes in that direction.

This is why we have single sex separation.

I feel this needs repeating

@Whatwouldscullydo

Right and if you have 2 on the same trip and one can share with the girls and one can't what happens then?

It's the 'what if' questions that form the basis of all safeguarding policies. Honestly, are you having problems grasping the information offered to you on this thread?

If you had read my previous posts you would see I was high lighting the problems this " case by case" approach would bring.

@Whatwouldscullydo

If you had read my previous posts you would see I was high lighting the problems this " case by case" approach would bring.

Not sure how I quoted you - sorry Scully. My post was aimed directly at the poster who seems unable to grasp basic safeguarding principles.

I think this situation where your daughter has chosen to is fine. But agree school shouldn't be leaving children to resolve this and parents should definitely need to give permission. Your dd sounds like a great friend.

Would she still be a great friend if she said no?

How can you say school shouldn't have put them in this situation then say its OK?

And why would parents need to give permission? Is there something about the situation that means school keep to pass responsibility for the decision onto someone else so for so they have no come back should it go wrong?

What, besides 4 words, is the difference between this and the other room mates boyfriend also sleeping in the room?

@autienotnaughty

I think this situation where your daughter has chosen to is fine. But agree school shouldn't be leaving children to resolve this and parents should definitely need to give permission. Your dd sounds like a great friend.

I would like to know why ‘this’ situation is different too?

Specifically, what is different about this trip that means it is ok verses other situations?

@autienotnaughty

I think this situation where your daughter has chosen to is fine. But agree school shouldn't be leaving children to resolve this and parents should definitely need to give permission. Your dd sounds like a great friend.

Why is it fine? Is it also fine for her to share sleeping accommodation with the boys?

@autienotnaughty

I think this situation where your daughter has chosen to is fine. But agree school shouldn't be leaving children to resolve this and parents should definitely need to give permission. Your dd sounds like a great friend.

This is utterly incoherent.

Your dd sounds like a great friend.

Do posters realise that when they are saying this, it reinforces to girls that they should be giving up their rights of safety, privacy and dignity to males? Effectively putting their own needs down the priority list, when those particular needs should be at the top.

I mean this is conditioning in real time for these girls. And we wonder why our girls have issues and wish to identify out of being a woman.

A great friendship is one where both parties can state boundaries expect them to be maintained.

Schools have such a tough job as it is without parents not wanting to seem like the ‘bad guy’ about decision they make for their children.
The school have said they manage on a case by case basis and involve the parents.
The parents aren’t happy, for the reasons given, so it’s up to the parents to explain to their own child why they have vetoed the suggested arrangements. Not the school.
And if the parents think they are right then why would they be worried about actually telling their child their reasons?
God knows we tells our DC that they can’t do stuff all the time, regardless of what everyone else’s parents are apparently letting them do or are okay with.

Again if case by case also involves parents unaware or not engaged with parenting then that leaves the children vulnerable.

Safeguarding is there to account for the fact that some parents don't give a shit. To ensure the kids receive equal protection.

@CrymeaRvr

Schools have such a tough job as it is without parents not wanting to seem like the ‘bad guy’ about decision they make for their children. The school have said they manage on a case by case basis and involve the parents. The parents aren’t happy, for the reasons given, so it’s up to the parents to explain to their own child why they have vetoed the suggested arrangements. Not the school. And if the parents think they are right then why would they be worried about actually telling their child their reasons? God knows we tells our DC that they can’t do stuff all the time, regardless of what everyone else’s parents are apparently letting them do or are okay with.

That is bullshit. Schools should never leave safeguarding to parents for periods of time the kids are in the schools care. How can parents be responsible when they are not there? That would be like making schools responsible for what kids get up to in the weekends.

All these arguments just because you think male and female children should be able to share bedrooms if they want to.

If After 24 pages some posters are still unable to understand that safeguarding does not and never should be carried out on a case by case basis and certainly should not dependent on the judgment of 14 year old children, there is literally no point in explaining it for the 58th time

@CrymeaRvr you're wrong. This isn't a difference in opinion - you fundamentally do not understand the basis of safeguarding and worse, seem determined to stand behind your incorrect viewpoint despite evidence/explanations/examples from those who do understand safeguarding.

@Theeyeballsinthesky is right. There's no point explaining it again to you because at this point it's either willfull ignorance or slavish idealogicalism on your part.