DfE settles in Cornwall case

[ResisterRex]

In The Times:

Parents force review of school trans guidance

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/79e44c92-3b52-11ed-a8ae-d2d57cd0511a?shareToken=0d2f7731ea5f88a5b2a41c3ab900d401

"Ministers are to review contentious guidelines on how schools should deal with gender identity after settling a court case with parents who had been accused of being transphobic.

...

The couple have now won £22,000 in legal costs after the department relented in the face of a judicial review of its decision not to support the parents in their battle with the school.

...

The Rowes highlighted to the education department what they said was expert evidence that revealed how “trans-affirming policies” allegedly can lead to “catastrophic outcomes”. But they claimed that Whitehall officials “refused to properly assess this evidence” and rejected the Rowes’ complaint.

At the High Court in February, Lord Justice Lane granted the parents permission to bring a full judicial review of the department’s decision. But lawyers for the department have now settled the case and paid the Rowes £22,000."

Robin, people here don't have a problem with you because you think you're a woman, it's because you are consistently showing your distaste for anything that is for the benefit of females and not males.

This

What is a bundle?

I'm really pleased with this outcome. DfE need to get their act together and issue the new draft guidance sharpish. I want it consulted on, amended if necessary, and published ready for next September.

It’s the bundle of documents used in court for a case. I’m sure our resident mesplainer can describe it better. After all pronoun is an expert

Nearly 4 am and posting petty messages on MN, that's not healthy.

I'd like it sooner than that - although I suppose the draft for consultation always gives the "direction of travel" and schools usually start adjusting practice when a draft comes out.
My worry is that these powerful organisations and individuals have been given free reign to trash long standing, evidenced principles about safeguarding, child psychology and wellbeing, political neutrality, safety in sport, the legal rights of girls to privacy and single sex spaces for so long, that rolling this back will be a battle. Especially as it involves children who have been gaslit by self interested adults into believing it's possible (and desirable) for them to change sex from their early years. Having to disavow them of these toxic beliefs will be hard.

yeah

this individual seriously needs to get a (different) hobby

I can't imagine working themselves up to a self righteous fury in the middle of the night is making them happy.

women who won't pretend to make you happy don't hate you, they just know what reality is.

reality Robin. I highly recommend it for long term contentment.

I havent read the full thread but based on the article in the IOW news, the problem seems to have been initially caused by the insistence of a boy/girl uniform at the school, the little boy wanted to (or his parents wanted him to) wear the 'girl' uniform

I cant help but think that this might have been avoided if the Rowes had simply told their son, its just a dress and he wants to wear it

Otherwise its counterproductive to say that there is a 'girls' way of dressing/playing/behaviour compared to a 'boys' way.

au contraire

from the article:

they were told that one of their sons would be demonstrating “transphobic behaviour” if he showed an “inability to believe a transgender person is actually a real female or male”.

their 6 year old son didn't just have to be OK with a boy in a dress, he had to behave as if he literally believed that boy was a girl

there's nothing OK about that. teaching / learning requires trust. if school are going to try to force children to believe things they know aren't true, how can they possibly have a successful learning relationship with the school?

Of course. It’s disrespectful and inappropriate.

I have no idea who made this comment about AB while she was giving her evidence.

Quite a number of those attending the AB hearing acted disrespectfully and inappropriately as the judgment records.

I see you're back @RobinMoiraWhite. Can we keep to the subject of the thread which is about parents and schools transing very young children and calling other young children transphobic if they don't believe these children have literally changed sex. What is your opinion on that?

And you still haven't answered either of these questions.

is it ok for parents/schools to trans children as young as 6?

in your opinion is it acceptable for a male teacher to teach students whilst he is wearing gigantic prosthetic breasts?

Are you seriously on here, Robin, telling women about what is 'disrespectful and inappropriate'?

I am genuinely astonished.

If Robin or anyone else wants to discuss Allison Bailey's case or court bundles could they keep that on an appropriate thread. I think this one is the most recent:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4637644-allison-bailey-appeal

The issue here is an important one about very young children being transed by parents or schools and the effect on them and the other children. It would be better if it wasn't derailed into discussing a completely different issue just because Robin has posted on it.

I only read the IOW news, not the times as I cant get into it but obviously that is true, we cant be teaching children things that arent true

I was going by the other article where they say 'he was confused about why he was dressing as a girl' or wtte. That is quite an easy solve, hes just wearing a dress, its just clothing.

I assume other conversations must have taken place for the little boy to have been expected to believe the child was a girl. Im wondering about all the other children in the classroom too, how do they feel?

I have to laugh.

I’m asked: ‘is something disrespectful and inappropriate’

And I answer: ‘Yes, it’s disrespectful and inappropriate’.

And the next post is: ‘Are you seriously on here, Robin, telling women about what is 'disrespectful and inappropriate'?

Get a grip.

Barristers don't prepare bundles other than in direct access cases. And OP is right that the High Court does not award compensation in judicial review cases, although it may in certain circumstances award damages.

From what I can see, the Rowes wrote to the DfE in 2017 (or shortly before) asking for a review of the guidance, relying on what they said was expert evidence. The DfE rejected that request. They applied for a judicial review of that decision in 2017. It has now settled with new guidance to be published in due course. To get this far, the following things had to happen:

• The initial request by the Rowes for a review

• A decision of a public body (the 2017 rejection of their request for a review)

• A Pre Action Protocol setting out why the Claimant (the Rowes) thought the decision was unlawful and what they wanted the DfE to do about it

• A response to Pre Action Protocol saying no for a second time

• The claim, which would ask the High Court to review whether the decision was lawful

• An acknowledgement of service and a defence from the DfE through its lawyers, saying no for a third time

The case then goes to a single judge at the "permission" stage who decides on the papers whether or not to grant permission for a review. If that is refused, the claimant can ask for an oral hearing.

I would guess from the sum in legal costs and the length of time that this has taken that permission was refused or only partially granted on the papers and that the Rowes renewed the application orally, and that it was at an oral permission hearing that permission was granted by the judge. But I emphasise that is a guess - it could have been delayed for many reasons and delay in itself can inflate costs if preparation is done and the time then wasted.

After permission is granted, the court will hear the full judicial review application.

It is not wholly unusual for a defendant to reconsider once permission is granted, taking the grant of permission as an indicator of the direction the wind is blowing. It seems here they have settled on the basis that the DfE now agrees that the guidance should be withdrawn and reviewed, as the Rowes asked for in 2017 and the DfE must have rejected in writing at least three times.

So it's a bit of a stretch to say they were going to do it anyway.

'Get a grip.'

So professional. Much rude.

Thanks Bluebell, that's really interesting to read.

Apologies for contributing to another petty derail. I shall desist.

Thanks, Blue bell, that's helpful. Lots we probably won't ever know, but I'd not be surprised if this case contributed to the DfE's decisions.

And interesting to see how the recently sacked teacher's court case goes. Stonewall law really doesn't seem to hold up to any scrutiny.

I don't know, Arabella.

I take it more as a sign that RMW is looking to self-identify as a well established MN poster. "I use the idiolect and everything," seems to be hovering.

Perhaps I should wait on sightings of particular initialisms or suggestions that other posters might 'give their heads a wobble' to confirm that thought.

However, setting aside attention-seeking sideshows and speculations as to a wish to seem like a MN regular, I deplore the creep of self-identified lobby groups who put forward lived experience and ideology as a substitute for expertise. I reserve contempt for those who allow such lobby groups to have power of organisations and services that should know far better and keep the group that they serve (children) at the centre of their considerations.

The suggestion, presumably, is that during the trial I created a sock Mumsnet account to make this comment.

My post merely mentioned the poster who popped up to instruct us on bundles during AB’s trial.

I certainly wouldn’t and didn’t suggest anyone openly draw the above inference from that (though RMW did) or indeed from RMW’s extremely aggressive response to them being mentioned. Facts are simply facts, nobody needs to suggest or speculate.

anyway, apologies for contributing to the merail. If the merailer returns then:

is it ok for parents/schools to trans children as young as 6?
a different case, but in your opinion is it acceptable for a male teacher to teach students whilst he is wearing gigantic prosthetic breasts?

Thanks, good to have this background.