The Key for School Leaders and RMW

[Brainworm]

The Key is a membership service for school leaders. It provides guidance, resources and CPD. Over half of all schools in England have membership. Every school I know uses it to check their policies and practices are compliant.

One of their 'top articles' this week is called 'Responding to the DfE's consultation on gender questioning children: guidance and resources. They suggest the article provides 'expert advice and resources to help you respond with confidence' to the consultation.

The article basically says during the consultation phase, don't follow the guidance as 'legal advisors' have suggested it may be illegal. It also says schools must continue to support trans pupils (like the guidance suggests you shouldn't).

It suggests Gendered Intelligence and Stonewall are a good resource to guide schools to completing their response and provides a link to the 'Pride and Progress' website, which name drops RMW and the tab labelled 'Supporting Guide for Consultation' takes you through to Stonewall's guide to responding to the consultation.

The reach of The Key shouldn't be underestimated. I think they are either out of loop on all that has been happening in this arena or have been captured. Either way, it's not good!

Great discussion. Add in to the mix the number of parents in senior positions - even the politicians who seem confused about how many sons / daughters they've got - who drive this for personal reasons.
Separating out the T from LGB is essential - especially for KCSIE. Remember Stonewall got to write a special section asserting that there were no issues with children being LGBT - where there clearly are for many children confused about their sex.

https://safeguarding.thekeysupport.com

This them?

From June 23:

https://schoolleaders.thekeysupport.com/administration-and-management/ethos-equality/specific-equality-considerations/whole-school-gender-and-lgbtq-inclusivity-audit/

Updated in January.

https://schoolleaders.thekeysupport.com/curriculum-and-learning/curriculum-guidance-all-phases/structuring-curriculum/curriculum-audit-gender-and-lgbtq-inclusivity/

Those last links don't work for me @ArabellaScott ?

Separating out the T from the LGB in KCSIE is essential. It's a safeguarding failure that they're conflated in this way.

Transing the gay away cannot be stopped without these groups being identified separately. Gay, lesbian and bisexual children are being failed by this.

The Key could surely get hammered on trading standards by this statement alone?

"The Key Safeguarding is the only service that supports your DSL and every single member of staff to get safeguarding right, every time. "

Really - the ONLY service? What about all that local authority training my local school staff attended from the LADO? And the safeguarding audits they undergo from the LA too?

If you're starting from a point of statements that are commercially driven and evidently untrue then I think it can really only go downhill from there.

It's in the key's interests to have endless guidance on endless topics. I don't think it's in children's best interests to make the adults in charge believe that they need to know about absolutely every nuance of DEI to the nth degree.

SLTs that are running their schools well will be fair and non-discriminatory and understand well how any or multiple differences can make a child vulnerable without needing to do endless audits or use new toolkits every 5 mins. In fact I'd suggest that not doing so will free up time to be proper teachers and leaders, and to safeguard children effectively which is their main job.

This is a perspective that's worth remembering in terms of current data and is likely to be why so many teachers don't see any of it as an issue.

At the same time those children for whom it is still an indicator of deeper issues will still be there within the trans identified cohorts and still require and deserve extremely careful safeguarding.

In many ways it's now worse for them as 'exploring gender identity' is so normalised, as indeed are the medical interventions and surgeries in popular culture/ social media.

The gatekeeping is now simply the lengthy waiting lists, though of course parents who affirm and are complete believers are now paying privately.

Personally I always feel it's a safeguarding issue to make claims that you are 'perfect at safeguarding.' It's an ongoing, reflective process, where you are constantly trying to improve and tighten. I know that's just advertising. But I agree it's false advertising

Is there data that supports that social transition leads to medicalisation?

I agree it seems likely, but it would be useful to see the data on this if anyone has it?

The One True Faith. Commercial or ideological?

Oh. Not sure why! I can't access the actual guidance as it's paywalled but the abstracts are there?

The 80% desistence 'even if they had socially transitioned', is that right?

I thought the 80% data was based on watchful waiting? Are there studies that still show 80% desistence even with social transition?

Cass has been very careful to say 'it's not a neutral act' whihc I interpreted as the data on whether it leads to medical transition or not is not yet in.

The reach of The Key shouldn't be underestimated. I think they are either out of loop on all that has been happening in this arena or have been captured.

Almost certainly the latter. We know that Stonewall and its allies have been lying about the law for ages and that schools and other organisations have been too lazy/stupid/cowardly to challenge them. And we know that Stonewall and allies have worked their way into influential positions in organisations, giving them the opportunity to dictate policy. It's very hard to fight back against that.

The thing for me with social transition is that it can only be done with the support of those around you, they are either compelled to support this or not.

If children are expected in schools to change pronouns for a child who is socially transitioning then they are being told: there is something called gender identity and if Suzy is 'exploring' hers then maybe it is something you should think about too? What is your gender identuty?

Even if this isn't explicitly taught or said, just having a child who socially transitions conveys to the other children this is a concept you need to think about.

This is a deeply harmful and confusing message for children and will continue to lead to social contagion in schools where one child transitions.

I don't want children to pick up the unhealthy idea that they have gender identity, that they should spend time working their's out and that they can change 'gender' as an option.

It's a mass confusion of all children if one child socially transitions. Particuarly with young children who are still dveleoping categorisation and linguistics They are still forming categories and to be told there is another 'category' they need to consider and place themsleves in, will cause confusion and more mental helath issues.

To protect all children the concept of social transition should not be supported in schools.

Parents who beleive in gender identity can do what they want at home, but they cannot ask schools or other children and families to support this.

Agree in general but not all schools are captured. There are quite a few headteachers (and presumably SLTs) who are quietly getting on with fulfilling their responsibilities in the law as it is and not how Stonewall imagines it to be and doing what's best for the whole school community and not just a few children / families. I'd argue that complying with unreasonable demands and telling them their identity relies on external validation probably isn't in the best mental health interests of children identifying as trans anyway...

My DDs school is one where this sanity prevails. I think it helps that it's a school with a variety of faiths and religious communities involved. They have to balance the needs of various religious faiths so gender ideology is pretty much the same thing. I.e. students will not be discriminated against for their beliefs but they cannot compel other students to believe in their religion through words or deeds. And the teachers don't model compliance with any one belief system.

And they all learn standard English and manage to pass their GCSE exams.

One good question for schools / governing boards would be a) whether they pay for the Key (or other such providers) b) if they do, how much and c) how do they justify spending that money in that way rather than on books or equipment for the children to use (or SEND support or extra TA time). Finally, isn't the Key outsourcing their thinking?

All of this can be done as a generally interested parent without having to get into gender ideology or paint a target on your child's back for activist staff.

I honestly think the question about paying outside organisations who have not been through the DBS checks and safer recruitment is a really important thing for parents to ask, even purely from a 'value for money and transparency' point of view.

One of my children's schools pays for a (rubbish) PHSE provider. The other does not, the one who does not shares resources with parents every week and is in all ways better than the one paid for. The slides are less pretty because the teachers do them themselves, but the content is a million times better and they are working in partnership with parents to really safeguard the children. Very much hoping to get DD2 into that school too (out of catchment now sadly).

Is there data that supports that social transition leads to medicalisation?

It's a central premise of the interim Cass review so it must be based on something- social transition is not a neutral act

Such an important point. There are many schools who have placed a safeguarding ring around the school and children. They don't allow political lobby groups to influence the provision of single sex changing toilets, sports etc. They don't have safeguarding breaching LGBT groups for children below the age of consent. Activism by staff is not encouraged while high education standards are. And so on.

I have so far been very lucky to be in such a school. I fear for the future though. Some changes have already happened such as new outsourcing of safeguarding rather than lea.

What the what now? Do parents know about this (this parent doesn't)?

And they wonder why homeschooling rates are increasing.

Rachels......yes the circa 80% is held in the Tav'i records and have been presented by Tavi staff.

Watchful waiting (as referred to by the Tavi) did/does include various aspects of social transitioning. Essentially it is about keeping an open mind about the child's gender identity, being mindful that it might be different to what they currently think of it as being. This is very different to the affirmative approach.

What the what now? Do parents know about this (this parent doesn't)?

A Company. I have no idea though if it's linked to the lea.

No idea.

I need to ask these questions

Do you know where this Tavi data can be accessed?

I thought the 80% was from Kenneth Zuckers clinic not the Tavi? Zucker's watchful waiting did not involve social transition.

If the 80% is from the Tavi how did they differentiate between kids who socially transitioned and who didn't? was it names/ pronouns/ dress/ all of it?

And the 80% desistance was the same whether they socially transistioned or not? or social transition is neutral? It has the same outcome as no transition?

TBH I'm suprised the Tavi have this level of data. They were extraordinarily bad at collecting data. I also wonder over what time period they were supporting children who socially transitioned and then continued to follow them and record they desisted?

In fact I'm recalling from Hannah Barnes' book that the Tavi never collected any data on desistance? I'd need to go and check this.

I'm not trying to catch you out, I want the inform because it's useful so important to this school and social transition argument.

I would have expected that social transition was more likely to lead to medical transition as a n adult. But if you are right and the Tvai have data that social transitioners were just as likely to desist as those who don't transition at all then it undermines the argument thst social transition shouldn't be supported in school. At least in as far as it having any negative consequences for the trans child. It's only the impact on other children?

It suggests that social transition isn't fixing an identity and is just harmeless exploration that childreb equally desist from. This seems unlikelyto me.

As Cass said it's not a neutral act. If it has the same outcome as no transition then it is neutral?