School Guidance out Tomorrow

[Igneococcus]

I don't have time to read this fully right now, but it sounds messy:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/789e1fd3-4a82-4b71-a0bf-e165b5f410b1?shareToken=054150e42690555c0ffe751a53776e92

Even if a child does have the PC of gender reassignment, for treatment of that child to be discriminatory requires:

• that the treatment results in detriment to the child
• that there is not a good reason for it.

Is there any evidence that not supporting social transition is detrimental?

Isn't "not forcing all the other children to lie" a good reason? Isn't "not making a serious psychological intervention" a good reason?

No.

But clearly some schools/ teachers think it is.

Because they've not had guidance that says it's not the neutral, reversible act they think it is.

Bell is saying it very clearly, an adult who agrees with the child is saying that they agree their body is wrong. Teachers need to be aware that they're actually making a clinical judgment by saying yes.

@noblegiraffe

Absolutely. I get that the guidance doesn't tell us definitively what the law is - it can't, because the law is unclear. But it is credible to say, for example, that the "process" is having undergone sufficient counselling and being put on a medically supervised pathway and that, yes, it should be the case that a child on a medically supervised pathway should be relatively rare.

Even if the bar is passed children will still have to use their own facilities and stick to the guidelines.

And no sanctions for wrong pronouns

As opposed to the "process" just being to rock up to school with new pronouns

The problem is that children police themselves on what is, and what isn't, normal behaviour for the sexes. I would argue it's innate but I'm guessing most on here would disagree. Recently one of my grandchildren just shy of his forth birthday described a girl from his nursery as a 'boy girl'. He recognised that most of the girls were not interested in playing the sort of "adventure game" that he and most of his boy friends enjoyed so this girl stood out as being different.

I agree that schools should not be reinforcing the sex stereotypes but they need to go further than that and celebrate the children who naturally defy those stereotypes i.e the effeminate boy or the tomboy girl. Over recent years those kids have been celebrated by adopting the label of trans so lets still see them celebrated without that label.

And that's the part that's missing.

How is the child going to be safeguarded?

This guidance mostly helps parents and schools. There's not enough clarity around safeguarding for the child.

This is not complicated, although Stonewall training makes it appear so

This, 10000 times over, till it gets into the most captured brain. This should be printed on leaflets and distributed to every school, NHS building and workplace.

No human being is ‘born in the wrong body’. No one can change sex. If you identify with another ‘gender’, it is just your choice of old sex stereotypes to conform to.

It really is that simple!

Have any of the schools bound up in all this, any of them who are so anxious to find out who's really a boy or really a girl, ever come up with literally one thing that they have said differentiates boys from girls?

I'm absolutely befuddled at the amount of resources taken up by this when they can't even articulate the very basic, underlying meanings they use?

Recently one of my grandchildren just shy of his forth birthday described a girl from his nursery as a 'boy girl'.

Or what used to be described as a tomboy. Everyone knew tomboys were girls, that has been the big negative change recently.

I agree.

"This guidance mostly helps parents and schools. There's not enough clarity around safeguarding for the child".

That's the missing bit for all of this - safeguarding children which is meant to be at the heart of schools has been casually abandoned in favour of the demands of adult transactivists.

It's hinted at in the guidance (section 5) and Bell describes it well here: www.channel4.com/news/school-transgender-guidance-very-progressive-claims-dr-david-bell

But schools urgently need more clarity and information, scenarios and answers about caring for the questioning child.

The questioning part needs to be seen as a trigger to a series of safeguarding processes.

Not sure I agree safeguarding is missing. It's the first overarching principle, states you need to know the biological sex of a child to protect them from harm, is clear as day about single sex spaces and harm, and Keeping Children Safe In Education is the primary document under "legal considerations", of which it says:

"The statutory guidance Keeping children safe in education (KCSIE) sets out the legal duties that must be followed to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children under the age of 18 in schools and colleges."

And it notes that it applies to high needs learners up to the age of 25.

My childrens primary school introduced that type of toilet block 9/10 years ago. My daugher was told with the correct medicine its possible to change sex, and was asked to declare her sexuality and gender identity when she was in yr 7, shes 2nd year of university now. So 8 years ago.

When did men in womens sport become a thing? I thought it was after this.

Even if it was before, its wild if schools saw a man in a womens long distance race and assumed it followed that boys could undress with girls in school.

Probably phrased that badly @ResisterRex . What I mean is that despite the requirements to safeguard children being at the core of education, as soon as trans ideology is mentioned, safeguarding is forgotten.

This.

If a child goes into school and starts demanding everyone, including the teachers, call him 'Your Highness' and that it damages his identity if they don't, and expects teachers to go along with it and enforce this on other children then they'd rightly be told 'no'. They might have some pastoral discussions, a call to the parents to discuss why, but no-one would go along with it.

It's utter madness that GI is treated so differently to everything else children do in some schools.

If a very Christian child went in and demanded all other children take communion then they'd be told no. (ditto the pastoral care etc)

If a child from a naturist family wanted to be their 'authentic self' at school and come in naked they'd be told 'no'.

Only one group are affirmed to the disadvantage of everyone else and allowed to totally overthrow the rules everyone else operates by - including safeguarding rules such as single sex spaces - and it's a safeguarding failure for them AND ALL THE OTHER CHILDREN to do this.

Agreed @MrsOvertonsWindow

Great thread by Clare page

https://x.com/nosecretlessons/status/1737439684077199765?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

This is a great thread by @VictoriaPeckham, but it only tells half the story. @educationgovuk, @ehgovuk and @Ofstednews FUNDED and RATIFIED Gendered Intelligence, Educate & Celebrate and No Outsiders, as part of a drive to embed the EA2010 into our national culture…

It was a dangerous piece of social engineering concerned as much with the integration of immigrants as LGBT rights, and it backfired badly and seriously harmed children and even our cultural understanding of British democracy. And the same Rights based agenda continues apace…

We need a Public Inquiry to clean this ideological possession out of gov and mandate deradicalisation of the education sector, not just some non-stat. guidance full of loopholes, trying to keep a lid on the damage already done and embedded by extensive training in school culture.

This guidance will be prone to easy updates and a new interpretation under a Labour gov. The civil service at the DfE and Ofsted are still heavily ideological possessed and are waiting for friendly Ministers to carry on their project.

This guidance is much too little, too late.

Public inquiry/ safeguarding case review

But there's nothing specific relating to any of of the 'novel, radical idea' that we don't immediately 'affirm a child who announces they're "trans"' in KCSIE @ResisterRex

Which is what schools have been doing thanks to the cooperative efforts of the bodies and charities described in Clare Page's tweets.

The rest is there around bullying, referrals policies etc.

KCSIE doesn't even mention single sex spaces from what I remember if the last time I looked. Which is bonkers when it talks at length about protecting girls from sexual assaults.

Yes, safeguarding case review definitely needed.

There has been a systematic failure of safeguarding across DfE, Ofsted and many (but not all) schools.

There are some schools who have managed to safeguard properly despite the shitshow from above. This should be noted and I bloody hope the adults who risked so much (being called bigots, more recently there's a teacher under threat of losing their DBS because they wouldn't use preferred pronouns I think) to put all the children in the school's wellbeing first and actually safeguard as they're supposed to in law get the recognition they deserve.

Interpreting an extremely ill defined thing such as 'gender reassignment' as 'doing what that child wants to the detriment of all the other children' I doubt would stand up in court. It's badly defined, but not a reason to throw safeguarding out of the window and as a PP has noted even if a child has a PC you also need to show a detriment. Treating that child the same as all others of their sex is not detrimental. There is absolutely no evidence this is the case and anyone with an ounce of reasoning skills or reading ability could have discovered the lack of evidence base for the TRA hysterical claims in an afternoon on MN.

Loads of morons on Twitter conflating historical mistreatment of gay children with speculation about how "trans" children will now be mistreated, as if they were entirely the same thing.

KCSIE fails in lumping in LGB and the T as if they're a homogeneous group when the needs of children in the LGB and the T are different and in some cases in direct conflict. I have no doubt this is deliberate.