Parents kept in the dark by teachers about their 16 year old daughter’s medical transition

[rogdmum]

In this case the Head appears to have supported the parents’ wishes that their daughter’s social transition not be supported, but some teachers ignored this and even went further, keeping the daughter’s use of cross sex hormones secret:

“The couple found out how far their daughter had progressed with transitioning only after hiring lawyers to demand sight of school records. To their astonishment, the records showed some staff also knew their daughter was taking cross-sex hormones as a step towards making her body more masculine.

Subsequent disclosures showed she had also been using a chest binder to flatten her breasts, another troubling revelation the school had not shared.”

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c4af6f1c-1276-11ee-9673-09365d127a9f?shareToken=dcf6a82e739f6596fbb7897c6484f5a4

Cross sex hormones for transing people should be seen as illegal, potentially harm- causing drugs for under 18s. There must be all sorts of drugs and procedures doctors are not allowed to prescribe or carry out, and cross sex hormones and transing could join the list.

Then any doctors who persevere could be prosecuted.

No doubt this won’t happen.

Absolutely terrifying reading for a parent of an autistic child only a few years away from puberty. They are so vulnerable.

I’m also really shocked that parents don’t have the right to medical records from 13 automatically. Anyone know what system there is for children with additional needs? My autistic child wouldn’t have any idea of how to make good decisions for themselves at 13 or 14.

The girl didn't have capacity to seek out a dodgy doctor herself. The arrangement was facilitated by the teachers and LGBT club.

To those saying that parents don't own their children, well nor do teachers own their pupils. In this story it is clear which adults have the child's best interests at heart. Not the ones pushing untested medications on her.

The issue is that prescribing CSH outwith NHS protocols is a child protection issue and the parents should have been informed.

Of course parents should have been involved. By the doctor. Because (imo) no child can consent to completely experimental treatment. But no teacher or school can be expected to know what NHS protocols are for every condition. So we can't be expected to know when a doctor is going against them except in the most egregious circumstances. And (while I strongly oppose these drugs) the GMC was unable to get a doctor struck off for prescribing them, so clearly the medical profession doesn't find their use completely out of bounds.

And of course the teachers shouldn't be procuring specific medical services for children. The limit is making sure they know their rights and signposting to NHS website and their normal GP. Any teacher who did anything differently needs investigating and possibly banning from the profession.

It really is important to be aware of the wider issues. If we set a precedent that schools inform parents about potential medical issues we risk setting back girls' rights to contraceptives, and it has implications for all (older) children's rights to medical privacy. 13 seems young to me, but I know of one 14yo who wanted the HPV vaccine against her parents wishes. She was told to go to her GP to discuss her options and her parents weren't informed that she asked what to do - I think that was the right decision.

If we set the precedent that teachers / schools can interfere with doctors' decisions regarding medical treatment there is potential for serious harm to children. And yes, deciding that a particular treatment is inappropriate or that the doctor has incorrectly assessed competency so overruling that by telling parents are both examples of interfering with medical decisions.

If the GMC advice is to report puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to them, that is a good thing. It keeps the medical information confidential but adds an extra check by people who are competent to do so. I assume my DSL is aware of that (she's pretty hot on this stuff), though I wasn't.

You're totally missing the point here.

You're writing as if child justed happen to be on medication that they'd sought for themselves, prescribed in normal circumstances, and the school happened to know about it. But, that's not what happened here at all.

It's important to recognise that both the parents AND senior management at the school told the teachers the child should not be socially transitioned.

A small number of teachers decided they knew best and went against the parents and their management to actively facilitate this child starting transition.

The child isn't being seen by a specialist service, nor by her own GP, but by a GP who is happy to prescribe testosterone to teenagers. Fuck knows what their motivation is, but if they're like the GP near me who does this (or even the same one, perhaps) then it'll be because they're a true believer in gender ideology.

The teachers know that this child has been put on a regime that may leave her infertile and in menopause in her 20s, indeed they have facilitated it.

This isn't the same as not telling parents a 16 year old is on the pill. It's such a huge betrayal of trust, not only if the parents but of the girl herself. They are letting their belief in this new religion severely cloud their judgement.

I hope the parents sue the arse off them.

This has got to be Brighton & Hove council.

Really frightening situation for those parents.

Something I just want to add: it seems to be taken as read that in these instances, it's all very clear, kids under 16 should be able to make decisions about contraception, abortion, etc. They are able to understand enough and, in practice, the pros are seen by most people as outweighing the cons.

I'm not sure that's so clear as people assume. When we are talking about kids with challenges for example - autistic children are often quite a lot less mature than their peers at 14 or 15. Kids with FAS too, and are also easily manipulated in many cases.

I am afraid there is no way to know this, but I suspect there are a lot of children in the 13 to 15 age bracket who access contraception or abortion who would be far better off to have their parents involved. They almost certainly think that isn't the case. But very often they are in fact being exploited or engaging in very unsafe behaviours. And while doctors or service providers may think they spot these cases, I suspect that often they don't. They just don't know the kids and their situations as well as the parents do. Or they wave aside risk indicators because they make assumptions about the kids being competent to make these decisions, as we see, plenty of doctors don't have great judgement on this stuff and essentially just follow guidelines.

All of which is to say, I just don't see comparing things like birth control as being all that convincing, even though there is quite a good understanding of how bc works and the consequences. That doesn't mean kids that age are overall well placed to deal with the complications of underaged sexual activity.

DemiColon · Today 23:21
All of which is to say, I just don't see comparing things like birth control as being all that convincing, even though there is quite a good understanding of how bc works and the consequences. That doesn't mean kids that age are overall well placed to deal with the complications of underaged sexual activity

I agree and think the only reason for thinking about bc this way is just pragmatic, because it is the lesser of two evils when compared with underage pregnancies.

The child isn't being seen by a specialist service, nor by her own GP, but by a GP who is happy to prescribe testosterone to teenagers. Fuck knows what their motivation is, but if they're like the GP near me who does this (or even the same one, perhaps) then it'll be because they're a true believer in gender ideology.

The doctor who does this needs to be struck off. Not acceptable and purely based on their own political beliefs- that means they're not competent to be a doctor. But it isn't fair to say the school are to blame. How does a school distinguish between a competent doctor and a rogue one?

The teachers know that this child has been put on a regime that may leave her infertile and in menopause in her 20s, indeed they have facilitated it.

How would the teachers know that? I know that because I've been involved in this for years, but how would the average teacher know? They wouldn't. You're assigning medical knowledge to people that just don't have it. Rightly so because teachers are not flipping doctors!!

I agree and think the only reason for thinking about bc this way is just pragmatic, because it is the lesser of two evils when compared with underage pregnancies.

Well you'd be wrong. Many children (u18s) are capable of understanding the difference between carrying a pregnancy term and abortion. It doesn't matter what you or I think are the lesser of two evils - a 16yo has the same right to bodily autonomy as I (37yo) do. If she doesn't want to continue the pregnancy then that's her choice, with no parent having any say over the matter (or even knowing).

@JemimaTiggywinkles "Imagine for a second we are talking about literally anything other than trans issues. If we were talking about abortion, contraceptives, sti medication, vaccines etc I really doubt many people here would be arguing that schools have a duty to inform parents that a child has received treatment from a doctor."

If you / any teacher found out that a 15 year old student with SEN had had an appointment with a new GP organised by the PE teacher and members of the Duke of Edinburgh club in the months before their overnight hike, would you let the parents know?
What if an art club, all members over the age of 16, had been told by the art teacher, "I know a GP who will give anyone a script for benzos, no questions asked." ?

It's not in any way breaching privacy to let parents know of these safeguarding concerns. The school doesn't even need to know if the student has been to see the new GP, gotten a script, or taken the meds. The broach is in the level of involvement the teachers and extra-curricular club have with advising and facilitating access to pharmeceuticals for a child.

Again I don't know the details here ( do others ?) But I highly doubt it was the teachers who put this child in touch with the medic. Much more likely to have been the voluntary organisation. But actually yr11s can use the Internet just like anyone else.

If a 15 year old boy sought a circumcision , maybe for cultural reasons ( 40% of American men are circumcised) and a surgeon deemed he was capacitous, then although ideally the parents would know, I am not sure anyone would have the right to tell them.

Why are you ignoring that the teachers were told not to transition this child by senior management?

This isn't about the school as a whole taking. considered approach that is felt to be in the best interests of the child.

This is about a small group of zealots thinking they know best and covertly facilitating the transitioning of a child, behind the backs of the parents AND the school. This is not what should be happening when we send our DC to school.

And now it has happened, the school should deal with those teachers robustly, but there is no indication from the article that this has happened, and if so, then the school as a whole is at fault too.

No, the teachers aren't doctors. So, they should not be promoting or supporting medical treatments for kids, covertly, behind their parents' backs. This is basic stuff. The teachers judgement here is way off.

Why are you minimising this? What is your agenda? No, you don't know the details, but you seem determined to fill in the gaps to minimise what actually happened. Why?

I wouldn't describe it as minimizing more evaluating before making a judgement: Why ?
2 words
Experience and pragmatism.

What are you trying to 'evaluate'?

And how? Evaluation is more than just dismissing what you don't like / agree with.

What am I evaluating ? WTF actually happened here before deciding school was right or wrong, social services were out of order or totally proportionate, were the parents protective or actually controlling ? Where did they get the meds ? Who prescribed them ? How old were they at that time ?

So, so, so much we just don't know. Things are very rarely so black and white.

Wow.

Why are you saying "the school" when supporting this child to transition wasn't something the senior management of the school endorsed, they had directed the staff NOT to transition the child.

But a rogue group of teachers took it upon themselves to ignore that. Surely that must raise alarm bells with you?

Every time you post as if the school were taking a considered approach, you are muddying the waters and obscuring this fact.

It's an absolute scandal and I'm pleased the press are reporting on this.

What you don't seem to understand is that gender ideology is very like a religion and there are zealots in many different professions (teachers, social workers, GPs and other clinicians etc), who will ignore their training, professional codes of conduct, safeguarding and principles in order to enable children to transition, which has the potential to be hugely damaging for those children.

It's a medical scandal that's happening right now, under our noses.

If every time an example of it hits the news, people like you say "oh, it's probably not as bad as it sounds" that's exactly how scandals like this are allowed to happen. You may think of yourself as pragmatic, but actually what you're doing is dangerous as it contributes to enabling this kind of thing to go on, it helps people look the other way.

To make it stop happening, to stop children with complex issues being transitioned by well-meaning but misguided professionals, we need people to stop and look at what's going on, to be outraged. Not hand wave it away as "probably fine, if only I knew all the details". It's far from fine.

Have you read Time To Think by Hannah Barnes?

I strongly suggest you do. I recommend the audio book if you're short of time to read (free with an audible subscription, if you have one. They also do a free trial, I believe).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1800751117/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0

Yes I have read that and the CASS report.
But a rogue group of teachers took it upon themselves to ignore that. Surely that must raise alarm bells with you?

You have evidence of this ? Or is this supposition on your part ?

Colleagu es, police and the COS are not doing their jibs. Fabricated induced illness is a criminal offence. Are staff reporting? are the police not investigating, are CPS not prosecuting? what's gone wrong?

It's in the article.

"Earlier this year, however, the couple discovered that some teachers at the school had been calling their daughter, now 16, by a boy’s name, against their wishes and the head teacher’s direction."

The head teacher told them not to. They did it anyway.

This is awful.
WTF were the teachers thinking?