Ministers finally agree guidance on trans pupils

[WarriorN]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12776337/Schools-discouraged-letting-pupils-change-pronouns-ministers-toughen-long-overdue-transgender-guidance.html

Of course certain parties will try to position it as such Sideways.

There will be much wailing by transactivists . But the guidance is out for consultation which will finally enable open discussion. If safeguarding is the main focus, it makes it more difficult for transactivists to push the "children must be free to explore this ideology / fetish.
As this thread shows, we go down all sorts of rabbit hole discussions (uniform, sexism, the incoherent laws etc) and there's no doubt that will happen during the consultation.
BUT we've now got so many articulate organisations, legal commentators and the majority of parents who will finally be able to speak up. The "behind the scenes" power of the activist groups to insist that only they can speak about children has been neutered.

Also, safeguarding goes both ways and teachers need to safeguard themselves.

The keira bell case has put a lot of onus on any agency involved in the safeguarding of children to be individually responsible for ensuring any child has the capacity to consent to any type of transition. I can imagine when the court cases start rolling in quite a few teachers being held responsible for indoctrinating and encouraging their students and then allowing them to transition in their 'safe space' classrooms without parents knowing. As the cass review says, we have no idea what the impact of socially transitioning a child has, so as a teacher there is NO WAY I am taking the liability on.

The guidelines are meaningless if they can be interpreted by those who simply want to continue doing what they are doing so.

They've been delayed due to needing to be legally watertight, as noblegiraffe says. It will make it easier for parents to hold schools accountable and also Ofsted too.

If there are clear lines in the sand drawn around safeguarding and the importance of single sex spaces, it should at least indicate some clarity around the importance of knowing that sex matters as a starting point.

For me it needs to also be very clearly reflected in KCSIE.

Also, safeguarding goes both ways and teachers need to safeguard themselves.

The keira bell case has put a lot of onus on any agency involved in the safeguarding of children to be individually responsible for ensuring any child has the capacity to consent to any type of transition. I can imagine when the court cases start rolling in quite a few teachers being held responsible for indoctrinating and encouraging their students and then allowing them to transition in their 'safe space' classrooms without parents knowing. As the cass review says, we have no idea what the impact of socially transitioning a child has, so as a teacher there is NO WAY I am taking the liability on.

Yes exactly this, and this is what safeguarding training needs to be able to express and highlight. Its currently complete absent from case studies etc in school safeguarding training in my experience.

But again, if it's in KCSIE, that would follow suit.

It depends as there are some teachers here and there who are extremely tra about this.

The Unions need to get behind it and for the right reasons - guidance linked to safeguarding will help tremendously.

My biggest concern is the teacher training courses. Particularly the B Eds. As they're so linked to universities.

It’s certainly going to be interesting. In Scotland where the guidance is to support social transition with or without parental awareness or agreement (and last week Jenny Gilruth told one of my MSPs this includes telling siblings at the school but not parents where the child wishes). This is non-statutory guidance yet schools like my daughter’s former school, George Watson’s, say they have no choice but to follow it.

it won’t surprise me at all if some schools in England flip that round and say because the DfE guidance is only guidance and not statutory they don’t need to follow it.

Picking and choosing which argument suits them?

A slightly different report in the Sun:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/24810670/kids-opposite-gender-trans-schools/

It means there will be a “presumption against” allowing children to swap their pronouns, names and uniforms in class.

But parents will have to agree for their kids to behave as another gender - and even then teachers should be "cautious".".*_

Changing rooms and toilets will still be based on biological sex rather than someone's identified gender.

So it will be the children of very activist parents.

I really hope the public debate around this really brings to the fore all the medical implications.

Jenny Gilruth is not very bright. That's astonishing advice, and surely contravenes many school safeguarding guidelines?!

The best thing to do is write to your Mp with your concerns. The more of them who've been contacted by this the better as this will be discussed over the next few weeks.

It's ridiculous advice like this that will hopefully raise flags within schools.

No safeguarding lead with any credibility would think that it is appropriate to involve siblings in a secret that needs to be kept in school away from their parents. Even if they have already somehow managed to accept the idea that keeping the secret in the first place was in the child's best interests.

Hopefully, any such safeguarding leads are surrounded by colleagues who can challenge this. The most obvious challenge being to cite the impact of social transition from the Interim Report of the Cass Review. The more widely this report is circulated in education, the greater the understanding of the harms associated with the affirmation pathway. I hope the guidance references it and breaks it down in a clear way.

Teachers who want to support social transition need to become outliers. I suspect that the majority will be doing so out of a misplaced understanding of how best to support children but there will be some activists in the mix too. Any that continue along the secret affirmation pathway once there is clear unambiguous guidance (I'm not holding my breath on this current draft, given the potential gaping loophole in the "exceptional circumstances") should be managed as a safeguarding risk. Even if they are doing it out of kindness and support, they are a risk to children.

The Guardian's take is somewhat different... https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/nov/22/guidance-expected-to-allow-transgender-children-to-socially-transition-in-english-schools

Teachers who want to support social transition need to become outliers.

In my experience they very much already are.

Almost all of the teachers I know are very firmly on the side of gc ideas and only feel hamstrung by the regulations/guidelines.

I'm hoping that these guidelines are enough to at least show teachers that the genderist ideology is one choice of ideologies that is not shared by most people. I think that's key. If we can show that it's a very specific set of ideas, and that not everyone shares it and that belief in 'gc' ideas is protected in law, we may be able to come back down to some kind of sense.

“Teachers who want to support social transition need to become outliers.

In my experience they very much already are”

how about amongst head teachers? Is the belief very much an outlier amongst management too?

how about amongst head teachers? Is the belief very much an outlier amongst management too?

I suspect there will be heads who will be extremely reluctant to admit how wrong they have been.

I don't believe my head is a true believer, but has allowed himself to be told what to think and has then been quite adamant. I don't know how he is going to climb down.

Given our horrific experience with him, I think the Head at my daughter’s school absolutely is a believer (in his role as Chair of HMC (Headmaster Conference, 300ish U.K. independent schools are members) last school year he platformed former Mermaids Trustee Bobbi Pickard at their Spring Conference). He’s this year’s HMC Vice Chair and so it’s going to be be interesting to see if the HMC ends up with a geographical split for their schools with Melvyn pushing the ScotGov guidance with their child led, only tell the parents if the child wishes, approach to their Scottish schools vs English independent schools following what looks like will be a very different approach.

I know teachers at her former school who do not feel able to speak out. I also know teachers who are completely bought into gender ideology.

I'm hoping that these guidelines are enough to at least show teachers that the genderist ideology is one choiceof ideologies that is not shared by most people. I think that's key. If we can show that it's a very specific set of ideas, and that not everyone shares it and that belief in 'gc' ideas is protected in law, we may be able to come back down to some kind of sense.

I completely agree. This is exactly how I position it when I talk to the school beyond the immediate impact on my daughter.

Putting the two beliefs side by side has really helped me to have IRL conversations that might otherwise be more tricky to navigate. The screenshot below is the summary version of what that looks like when written down.

Thanks, this pretty much confirms what I believe. I believe the vast majority of people are not onboard with this but the higher up in society you go the more likely people are to believe in the progressive ideology of which this is a part of.

I suspect there will be heads who will be extremely reluctant to admit how wrong they have been.

I don't believe my head is a true believer, but has allowed himself to be told what to think and has then been quite adamant. I don't know how he is going to climb down.

Hopefully it will be possible to openly acknowledge a shift.

Obviously I've not been a Head who has adopted this belief as if it were a truth, but the current DfE guidance is so woolly that schools were left at the mercy of cleverly organised external agencies who produced lots of information in support of gender identity as something that we all have. In theory, the shift that they need to make is to recognise that they also accommodate the alternative belief, now that it is legally protected as being WORIADS.

Indeed it is!! Not a huge surprise but FFS 🤦‍♀️
On a positive note, maybe everyone feels like there has been a generally positive shift, albeit not completely ideal. The key is to make sure that the loopholes are closed and that the EA is clarified to make it clear that sex means biological sex. That way, the false narrative that the guidance may not be compatible with the EA disappears.

I'm just leaving this here. Guidance for the Scottish government new guidelines from Forwomen scotland. Consultation ends tomorrow!

https://forwomen.scot/21/11/2023/statutory-guidance-for-rshp-in-schools/

This is such a relief to hear. Not that I want to discriminate (unfairly) against trans people but I think sensible boundaries will be enormously helpful for schools and pupils. Young people really need adults to give them the guardrails considering how mad the online discourse is that many of them will be lapping up on social media.

Sadly this isn't my experience at all. Maybe because I teach in London most teachers are younger.

What is with the guardian article? It’s almost completely inaccurate?

Changing names is not just about a girl wanting to be considered a boy, or vice versa. Children being bullied, racist unwillingness to pronounce a name properly, for example.