Times on Sex Matters survey: 8 in 10 teachers say their secondary school has trans or non-binary pupils

[ResisterRex]

This is in today's paper and states again that Dept for Education is working on the guidelines.

8 in 10 teachers say their secondary school has trans pupils

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f2a3bcfe-b906-11ec-94e5-2197dead5942?shareToken=429e243ebe8065bf8d9d275c535357a9

"Asked what they thought had contributed to students’ altered identity, approximately 60 per cent of secondary school teachers cited there being trans or non-binary celebrities in the media. About 80 per cent said their school would refer to a pupil by their chosen name and pronouns if asked by a trans or non-binary student and their parent."

And

"A spokesman for the Department for Education said yesterday: “We recognise that gender identity can be a complex and sensitive topic for schools to navigate.

“We know many teachers are having these important conversations with their pupils, including through the relationship, sex and health education curriculum which is designed to foster respect for others in a way that respects everyone’s views.

“We will be working with the Equalities and Human Rights Commission as we consider our next steps for supporting schools in this area.”"

I hope they recommend stopping teaching transgenderism in schools.

And more fully address the prolific and degrading nature of porn.

As starters.

“ About 20 per cent said their school would not inform parents if a student changed their gender identity at school and had not told their parents.”

Gosh. Lucky me being part of that 20%. 😡

@rogdmum - I'd hope it was higher than 20% there are safeguarding implications of informing families. Refer the student on for support, refer to DSL, do NOT take it upon yourself to out your students.

There are safeguarding implications, Grammar. But one of them is that students experiencing gender-related distress are more vulnerable to other MH issues, and that is absolutely something teachers need to tell the people who are responsible for getting them help: their parents.

With older kids (16+) the issues are different as they can access their GP themselves and expect medical privacy.

Schools should not be concealing the MH problems of 11/12 year old children from their responsible adults.

[quote GrammarTeacher]@rogdmum - I'd hope it was higher than 20% there are safeguarding implications of informing families. Refer the student on for support, refer to DSL, do NOT take it upon yourself to out your students.[/quote]
I don't think you understand what the word safeguarding means.

Also worth school staff who read this actually reading the interim Cass Review and learning that affirmation is considered to be a healthcare intervention: it’s not a neutral act.

Therefore, as a school making a decision to affirm a child’s identity and pronoun choices, you are not ‘safeguarding’, you are making an intervention in the child’s healthcare that you are not qualified to make.

Do you want to be in that position when the legal actions begin?

I thought the government have already asserted that teachers can no longer collide in socially transitioning children without their parents knowledge.

Because concealing that from parents obviously is a safeguarding issue, GrammarTeacher. Not sure why you think the opposite?

*collude!

[quote GrammarTeacher]@rogdmum - I'd hope it was higher than 20% there are safeguarding implications of informing families. Refer the student on for support, refer to DSL, do NOT take it upon yourself to out your students.[/quote]
As mentioned by tabby I’d suggest having a good read through the interim Cass report, though I don’t believe you will. Social transition is an active intervention and teachers are not qualified to make the decision as to whether or not to support it without parental involvement (and bearing in mind their parental rights as well).

In our case, we found out via a SAR that the school supported our daughter’s social transition behind our backs (although they did tell her 17 year old brother “in confidence”) because “We just saw a young person who had had many issues in the past and we thought this may have been an answer.”

The “many issues” had been extensive bullying and ostracisation over the course of her first year at the school.

Our experience is fairly typical and I know many many parents where their gender distressed child has suffered from bullying or trauma (physical and/or sexual) . Keeping the support of a social transition from parents is not OK. If a school has serious safeguarding issues about any child, nor law safeguarding processes should be followed, but in the vast majority of cases, parents should be fully involved in anything that is designated an “active intervention”.

*nor law should be “normal”

[quote GrammarTeacher]@rogdmum - I'd hope it was higher than 20% there are safeguarding implications of informing families. Refer the student on for support, refer to DSL, do NOT take it upon yourself to out your students.[/quote]
What dangerous advice.

What powers do a school have to change a child’s name in registers and refer to them as a different name. As the Cass report states that ‘affirmation’ is not a neutral act what powers do a school have to do this? Isn’t it assuming the rights of a parent and I thought there were only very limited circumstances where anyone other than a parent could do this and all require third party authorisation, e.g. court order to do so? I’m not thinking about a policy issued by an LEA but where the authority to do it comes from e.g. Childrens Act. I sign so many consents re trips, photos, providing medical treatment in an emergency etc etc but nothing that extends to this. Thank you

‘If a school has serious safeguarding issues about any child, nor law safeguarding processes should be followed, but in the vast majority of cases, parents should be fully involved in anything that is designated an “active intervention”.’

This is right. If a DSL talks to a child about their feelings - not making ANY promises about secrecy - and the child is frightened, or discloses previous abuse or something that might suggest a credible risk of abuse (the parent disapproving of social transition isn’t abuse), then the DSL should contact SS.

Most parents don’t abuse their kids. The gender lobby thrives on this secrecy and narrative that sets kids against parents. The vast majority will simply be concerned and want to help.

"I hope they recommend stopping teaching transgenderism in schools."

Perhaps that might appear in section 28......

Schools can’t change anything without parents’ permission. At least the school I teach at can’t.

We have seen (female) children who wished to have a ‘boy’/neutral name earlier in their school career ‘revert’ to their given name by Year 11. My feeling is that this is increasingly a ‘pre-teen’ fad, and the older children who presented as gender-questioning earlier in their school career are now distancing themselves from it somewhat.

Social contagion. Instead of telling girls to undo their boundaries, the boys need to be told to get comfortable with gender non-conforming boys.

@walksen

"I hope they recommend stopping teaching transgenderism in schools."

Perhaps that might appear in section 28......

You probably don't realise that most women here are aware of the Denton report and the stated need to align transgenderism with sexual orientation in order to appropriate support and legitimacy.

Additionally, I believe that female autism/ADHD presentation should be more widely discussed and disseminated in schools (and society in general). If people understood how anxiety/sensory issues/fear of change/not fitting in manifested themselves in teenage girls (E.g. anorexia, gender dysphoria), we could help them understand their feelings and thought processes, rather than letting them find out for themselves from people on TikTok who don’t have their best interests at heart.

Section 28 wrongly prevented schools from teaching the indisputable fact that some people are exclusively same-sex attracted.

There is nothing indisputable about the idea that everyone has an innate ‘gender identity’.

There are also issues of age appropriateness across the spectrum of teachings about relationships, sexuality and gender. I might be accused of ‘heteronormativity’ for saying I don’t want my kids taught about anal sex when they’re five, but I don’t want them taught about PIV sex either. They’re too young. I might be perfectly happy for my 4 year old child to learn that some families have two dads, but I really don’t want them learning about commercial surrogacy.

Surely there would be insurance issues if schools changed the identity of pupils? For example if they take children on a trip or if a child has an accident in school, which name is covered by the insurance? If they use the new name, would the insurer say "well then your insurance is invalid"?

Gosh, only 80%? Seems low. My son is 18 and I don't know any school locally that doesn't have trans or nonbinary pupils.

[quote GrammarTeacher]@rogdmum - I'd hope it was higher than 20% there are safeguarding implications of informing families. Refer the student on for support, refer to DSL, do NOT take it upon yourself to out your students.[/quote]
There are serious safeguarding implications of NOT informing parents.

@PermanentTemporary

Gosh, only 80%? Seems low. My son is 18 and I don't know any school locally that doesn't have trans or nonbinary pupils.

Anecdotal from personal experience, but it's much less common to Id as trans and non-binary in ethnic minority and white working class demographics. We haven't had any students Iding as trans at my school. The students ask "isn't it just like identifying as black?' I nod thoughtfully....

‘For example if they take children on a trip or if a child has an accident in school, which name is covered by the insurance? If they use the new name, would the insurer say "well then your insurance is invalid"?’

Most schools have the ability to record a legal name and a ‘goes by’ name. Which is sensible in some situations.