Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Telegraph: Teaching union opposes schools having to tell parents if child changes gender

137 replies

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 08:39

Read it and weep:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/05/union-against-schools-telling-parents-child-changes-gender/

"A teaching union will campaign against government plans to force schools to tell parents if their child changes gender.
Members of the National Education Unionn_ (NEU) agreed on Friday to oppose what teachers described as the “compulsory ‘outing’” of pupils to parents.
Teachers at the union’s annual conference in Bournemouthh also said they would campaign against a ban on any aspect of “social transitioningg” in schools, which could include allowing children to change their pronounss_ or use lavatories or changing facilities of the opposite sex.
The motion, approved by the majority of delegates at the conference, was drawn up in response to draft government guidancee_ on gender-questioning children.
The long-awaited advice states that schoolss_ in England should not accept all requests for social transitioning and should involve parents in any decision that is made.
Speaking in favour of the campaign against the guidance, Kathryn Barton, an NEU member, said she knew of a seven-year-old who had transitioned during the summer holiday and said that “not a single pupil” had a problem with it.

...

Midge Lowe, a teacher from Doncaster, said the Government’s draft guidance was “regressive trash” and said teachers must campaign for it to be withdrawn.
...

No delegates at the conference spoke against the motion, which also stated that “schools, colleges and external providers should not change or remove LGBT++_ inclusive policies or curriculum content as ‘knee-jerk’ response to political rhetoric”."

The same union voted to affiliate with Just Like Us

https://x.com/safeschoolsuk/status/1776511307564335381?s=46&t=WHoOZZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
duc748 · 06/04/2024 17:19

The Union supports the right of all women (including trans women) to safe spaces

So, not safe, then.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/04/2024 17:26

AdamRyan · 06/04/2024 17:02

What the actual heck.

How are schools going to perform a "quick sex change" to "make their bodies right"? Confused and if they do "perform a quick sex change" how are they planning to keep that a secret?

What an odd take on it

I was referring to the article in the OP which actually quotes an NEU member talking about how quick and easy it is for a 7 year old to change sex:
"..she knew of a seven-year-old who had transitioned during the summer holiday and said that “not a single pupil” had a problem with it. Ms Barton said: “They [the pupils] very easily changed his pronouns that they used to refer to him".
In other words, pretending a 7 year old has changed sex.

You can read for yourself the rest of the article about the NEU's stance on breaching safeguarding guidance & law by transitioning children in secret from their parents.

Socially transitioning a child is telling them that they're the opposite sex - ie changing sex from their birth sex. It's a massive unevidenced social experiment on children with a significant psychological impact. Cass is clear it's not a neutral act and it's something that adults in schools have no qualifications in dealing with. Yet the NEU is in favour of it!

You can find more evidenced and balanced views about socially transitioning young children from a qualified clinical psychologist who is explicit about the harm done when adults pretend children have changed sex.

https://www.transgendertrend.com/childhood-social-transition/

A childhood is not reversible - Transgender Trend

Childhood social transition is seen as 'kind.' A clinical psychologist explains what we set a child up for when we socially transition them.

https://www.transgendertrend.com/childhood-social-transition

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 17:36

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 06/04/2024 15:35

Surely there must be some sort of legal remedy - outside of individual parents having to put their children through a trial - if a teaching union is acting against statutory safeguarding guidance and law, which they are?

I'd crowdfund for that.

It is possible for TU members to take their union to ET, yes. So if there were a group of members who felt they had a discrimination case (eg a GC group, for the purposes of this discussion), legal action is a hypothetical possibility.

OP posts:
MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/04/2024 18:03

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 17:36

It is possible for TU members to take their union to ET, yes. So if there were a group of members who felt they had a discrimination case (eg a GC group, for the purposes of this discussion), legal action is a hypothetical possibility.

Teachers trying to uphold safeguarding in the face of transctivism are currently in a dangerous position. But the new guidance will make it easier as even if it's non statutory, it clearly lays down safeguarding principles, is clear that mixed sex undressing and sleeping is not allowed etc. So a Union defying guidance that schools are expected to follow and refusing to support teachers would be in difficulties I would think?

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 18:09

Let's say the guidance is adopted. All guidance is meant to be followed and the DfE has other guidance that's not statutory, which schools etc are meant to follow.

So if the union instructs its members to defy this guidance, then I imagine the members have a case against the union:

  • inducement to break the rules (even the law given some of the guidance references legislation)?
  • coercion to break the law on impartiality?
  • lack of representation in the workplace as a result of these things?
  • then any aggravating or add-on factor if the group complaining against the NEU has a common feature (sex, belief etc), as direct or indirect discrimination?

IANAL but the NEU position doesn't seem correct at all.

OP posts:
AllProperTeaIsTheft · 06/04/2024 18:12

borntobequiet · 06/04/2024 11:14

Edapt is a sort of “non-union” union.

A family member, considering training to be a teacher and working as a cover supervisor for experience, got very good support and help when the school treated her badly. She’s staying with Edapt into her training and beyond. It doesn’t get involved in politics.

https://www.edapt.org.uk/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIrMyXuaythQMVkJpQBh1L6AD3EAAYASAAEgLZTfD_BwE

Yes, I switched from NEU to Edapt last year.

Nenen · 06/04/2024 18:20

@esmeisa and @duvet The NASUWT recently published a very interesting response to the government guidance that goes some way to explaining why the NEU appear to be taking such an extreme stance. In a nutshell, the NASUWT believe that schools following ill-conceived, contradictory, vaguely worded and unresearched government ‘guidance’ is likely to open teachers and schools up to litigation. It is clear that, once again, this government is failing pupils, parents, schools and teachers by publishing what they think is easy vote-winning claptrap based on nothing more than their own rhetoric, rather than well researched, thoughtful and helpful statutes.

NASUWT Response to the Department for Education Guidance for Schools and Colleges: Gender Questioning Children 12 March 2024

If you are interested in further reading of an intelligently researched book on some of the history behind the current situation, I recommend Helen Joyce’s book, ‘Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality’.

https://www.nasuwt.org.uk/static/d2972bda-2f37-4711-ae6fed997f1b4131/Consultation-Response-DfE-Guidance-for-Schools-and-Colleges-Gender-questioning-Children.pdf

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/04/2024 18:44

Nenen · 06/04/2024 18:20

@esmeisa and @duvet The NASUWT recently published a very interesting response to the government guidance that goes some way to explaining why the NEU appear to be taking such an extreme stance. In a nutshell, the NASUWT believe that schools following ill-conceived, contradictory, vaguely worded and unresearched government ‘guidance’ is likely to open teachers and schools up to litigation. It is clear that, once again, this government is failing pupils, parents, schools and teachers by publishing what they think is easy vote-winning claptrap based on nothing more than their own rhetoric, rather than well researched, thoughtful and helpful statutes.

NASUWT Response to the Department for Education Guidance for Schools and Colleges: Gender Questioning Children 12 March 2024

If you are interested in further reading of an intelligently researched book on some of the history behind the current situation, I recommend Helen Joyce’s book, ‘Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality’.

Thank you for this. I agree that the NAS / UWT submission clearly identifies the legal challenges underpinning the guidance. There is a complete lack of case law. Stonewall and other self interested trans groups have been able to influence school policy & practice despite their lack of safeguarding & education knowledge / expertise with many schools failing to exercise due diligence. Nobody has to date challenged the assumption that the adult concept of changing sex should apply to children of any age which is a major flaw.

It's an almighty mess and the NAS / UWT are right to challenge the lack of case law and clear legal guidance that underpins this. We know that transactivist groups will target individual schools putting unacceptable pressure on them.

While the guidance is a step in the right direction, the major legal flaws will be an issue and it's unfair to expect schools to deal with them. The government needs to step up and sort out this mess, ensuring that all legal challenges are directed at them.

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 21:23

Nenen · 06/04/2024 18:20

@esmeisa and @duvet The NASUWT recently published a very interesting response to the government guidance that goes some way to explaining why the NEU appear to be taking such an extreme stance. In a nutshell, the NASUWT believe that schools following ill-conceived, contradictory, vaguely worded and unresearched government ‘guidance’ is likely to open teachers and schools up to litigation. It is clear that, once again, this government is failing pupils, parents, schools and teachers by publishing what they think is easy vote-winning claptrap based on nothing more than their own rhetoric, rather than well researched, thoughtful and helpful statutes.

NASUWT Response to the Department for Education Guidance for Schools and Colleges: Gender Questioning Children 12 March 2024

If you are interested in further reading of an intelligently researched book on some of the history behind the current situation, I recommend Helen Joyce’s book, ‘Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality’.

I'm really sorry but I couldn't find a serious challenge to the govt consultation in this link. The characterisation of the document under consultation as "ill-conceived, contradictory, vaguely worded and unresearched government ‘guidance’ is likely to open teachers and schools up to litigation" isn't one I can reconcile with what was put out to consultation. I do think the question of what to do with children who've already transitioned is a valid one but that's about it really (unless you count the Sex Matters point that the govt should adopt a proforma policy for schools that they're willing to defend in court)

OP posts:
ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 21:30

It'll be instructive to see what the unions have to say about this on Wednesday, and why they're so pressed in schools there's a million things they can't do, except defend and expend energy and time on this. How are they even qualified? They're not.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/06/children-socially-transition-face-grave-psychological-risks/

"Transgender childrenn_ face grave psychological consequences if they are allowed to “socially transition”, a landmark review is expected to say this week.
The warning comes amid a huge rise in the number of children identifying as transgender, and deep concern that schools have been allowing pupils to change gender without their parents’ knowledge, despite Government guidancee_ to the contrary.
The Cass revieww_ into gender identity services for children, which will be published on Wednesday, has promised to consider the “important role of schools” and the challenges they face in responding to “gender-questioning” pupils.
The review, led by Dame Hilary Cass, will include an analysis of scientific literature on the effects and outcomes of social transitioning.
It is expected to say that children may experience “psychological” repercussions as a result of being allowed to change their name and pronoun to the gender of their choice. The interim report released in 2022 noted that changing a child’s name and pronouns was “not a neutral act”.
Prepubescent children should not be put on the same “pathway” as older adolescents who wish to identify as the opposite gender, the final review is expected to say.

The review’s findings are likely to be reflected in the Department for Education’s (DfE) official guidance for teachers on how to deal with transgender children, the final version of which is due to be published later this year.
...

Since the publication of the interim review, concerns have been raised with Dame Hilary about the “schools to clinics pipeline”, in which children are allowed to live as the opposite gender, thereby creating demand for more serious medical interventions later.
Earlier this week, the biggest survey of its kind revealed that primary school teachers were letting pupils change their name and pronoun without informing their familiess_.
An analysis of more than 600 school equality and trans policies reveals that up to three-quarters misrepresent laws protecting sex and gender, with some implementing rules that allow boys to use girls’ lavatories and changing rooms if they say they are a girl.
It also emerged this week that a group of Church of England schools told teachers that they would probably be breaking the laww_ if they said a person cannot change their biological sex.
Maya Forstater, the chief executive of the charity Sex Matters, who has spoken to Dame Hilary and her team, said: “Doctors are having to deal with gender-confused children who have already been socially transitioned at school for years, and are, as a result, very disturbed by the idea of going through pubertyy_, which will develop their secondary sex characteristics. If social transitioning in schools is stopped, it will take the pressure off clinics.
“The Department for Education needs to say there is no way to keep children safe in schools while you are pretending that a boy is a girl, or that a girl is a boy. You are putting children through a psychological experiment with no clinical oversight. The whole thing is a fantasy being sold to children by adults who should know better.”
Prof Michael Biggs, a sociologist at Oxford University, said: “We do know from a longitudinal Dutch study that there is compelling evidence that socially transitioning does lock in transgender identity.
“It measured gender dysphoria before puberty and then came back several years later. You cannot treat it as an innocuous measure.
“I am hoping that the review will acknowledge that this was a major intervention which prepared the ground for medical interventions. We have to at the very least understand that this is the beginning of the process of physical transition.”"

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 06/04/2024 21:36

😯

AdamRyan · 07/04/2024 00:31

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/04/2024 17:26

I was referring to the article in the OP which actually quotes an NEU member talking about how quick and easy it is for a 7 year old to change sex:
"..she knew of a seven-year-old who had transitioned during the summer holiday and said that “not a single pupil” had a problem with it. Ms Barton said: “They [the pupils] very easily changed his pronouns that they used to refer to him".
In other words, pretending a 7 year old has changed sex.

You can read for yourself the rest of the article about the NEU's stance on breaching safeguarding guidance & law by transitioning children in secret from their parents.

Socially transitioning a child is telling them that they're the opposite sex - ie changing sex from their birth sex. It's a massive unevidenced social experiment on children with a significant psychological impact. Cass is clear it's not a neutral act and it's something that adults in schools have no qualifications in dealing with. Yet the NEU is in favour of it!

You can find more evidenced and balanced views about socially transitioning young children from a qualified clinical psychologist who is explicit about the harm done when adults pretend children have changed sex.

https://www.transgendertrend.com/childhood-social-transition/

OK thanks. I read your post as saying schools were actually changing children's sex without parents knowledge and was a bit surprised Confused
Should have picked up on the sarcasm

ChristinaXYZ · 07/04/2024 00:32

borntobequiet · 06/04/2024 11:14

Edapt is a sort of “non-union” union.

A family member, considering training to be a teacher and working as a cover supervisor for experience, got very good support and help when the school treated her badly. She’s staying with Edapt into her training and beyond. It doesn’t get involved in politics.

https://www.edapt.org.uk/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIrMyXuaythQMVkJpQBh1L6AD3EAAYASAAEgLZTfD_BwE

My other half switched Edapt for the last few years. I do not understand why any teacher is still in the NEU. The NASUWT is not quite as bad but there are alternatives - Edapt (though not a full trade union), Affinity (is a trades union and covers education) is non-political.

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 07/04/2024 01:03

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 17:36

It is possible for TU members to take their union to ET, yes. So if there were a group of members who felt they had a discrimination case (eg a GC group, for the purposes of this discussion), legal action is a hypothetical possibility.

This may well be right but....

Before we get to whether the teachers are discriminated against.

Surely any union suggesting / encouraging teachers to break safeguarding guidance and law could be legally challenged over that illegal, safeguarding breaching advice?

Their members are bound by law to uphold both KCSIE and Working Together to Safeguard children. Their advice is the opposite of doing this.

p. 14 of the STATUTORY safeguarding guidance (Working Together) applying to all organisations (including schools) who work with children lays out the principles for working with carers and parents which are ridden over roughshod by any recommendation that children are socially transitioned without speaking to / informing parents.

Bearing in mind that it is actually impossible for schools to keep this secret when they're also coercing hundreds of other children to use wrong -sex pronouns (thereby , under existing definitions in KCSIE, potentially emotionally abusing them - my interpretation would be this action would definitely constitute emotional abuse as outlined in KCSIE if they are primary school aged and debatably at secondary but almost certainly for children with SEND who are being coerced into using non standard English and wrong-sex pronouns).

And that's before we even get to the fact that toilets are supposed to be single sex over 8 under existing law so THAT law will be being broken by this guidance if it means children are put in mixed sex toilets (and again, without parental knowledge or consent breaches Working Together etc).

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 07/04/2024 01:07

Why do we accept the TRA framing? We don't need EA 2010 here. It shoudn't be the primary law when it comes to children in schools. If safeguarding law / statutory guidance overrides GDPR - as clearly stated in KCSIE that it does - then it surely also has primacy over EA2010?

I'm sure there is discrimination against science realist teachers and parents (including those of faiths requiring single sex spaces to remain as expected under existing laws in schools) too but PLEASE can we address the serious safeguarding law breaches before we get to discrimination?.

Are there literally no lawyers who specialise in safeguarding law and existing statutory guidance? Is it all basically meaningless and totally pointless unless serious harm comes to a child (which is quite possibly actually happening here although everyone is working hard to not record any facts about that)?

What about adultification of children which is the cornerstone of gender ideology? This used to be seen as a red flag for safeguarding and potential abuse - again developmentally inappropriate expectations are said to potentially be emotional abuse as outlined in KCSIE - and this union and apparently schools, doctors and bloody everyone else except a few brave whistleblowers and parents are framing children as adults routinely. It's a safeguarding failure. If it's not, why can children decide what sex they want to be but can't drink, drive, get a job, get married or have sex? Because it's definitely just as serious as all these things and in some cases more serious. I'd rather my teenager decide to drive, which I'm fairly confident she could do right now safely with a bit of tuition, than go down the irreversable pathway of sex change before she's fully matured.

And why the ever living Tunnocks am I, a Mum on Mumsnet (albeit with some experience in education) seemingly one of only a few pointing these blazingly obvious facts out? Living in hope for some sense from Cass on Weds.

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 07/04/2024 01:12

THIS is when we need LangCleg back, she would have said all of this more coherently and understands the law better. But oh no, talking about safeguarding isn't NICE and THIS is the end result.

duc748 · 07/04/2024 01:53

Of course you are right, @Dumbledoreslemonsherbets , it's madness.

Datun · 07/04/2024 04:06

Placemarking for the explosions on Wednesday.

ResisterRex · 07/04/2024 07:06

I definitely don't disagree with you @Dumbledoreslemonsherbets but I think action against a union would need to come from the government in the circumstances you're setting out. I can't see Keegan doing that, or doing it well.

OP posts:
ResisterRex · 07/04/2024 07:08

Datun · 07/04/2024 04:06

Placemarking for the explosions on Wednesday.

Or even Tuesday?!

Why do schools let children choose pronouns at four, ask parents

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ae71a27f-053c-44a8-bf26-712f6910d07a?shareToken=b9bd91d548b8d6d663f3c147b04c8d5d

"Parents will call for an independent inquiry into how schools have allowed children as young as four to choose their own names, pronouns and uniforms.

The final report by Dr Hilary Cass into a review of England’s gender identity services for children will be published on Tuesday. It was commissioned by the NHS to make recommendations on how to help young people who question their gender identity and followed concerns that there was a lack of evidence and medical consensus in the way some young children were being treated.

Cass has promised to consider “the important role of schools”. But families say schools also need to be the focus of a full investigation. They hope the final Cass report will confirm that socially transitioning a child — calling a child with gender dysphoria by the name and pronouns of their chosen sex and letting them choose what uniform to wear — is not a “neutral” intervention."

OP posts:
DanglingMod · 07/04/2024 07:11

Caaarrrl · 06/04/2024 11:26

I don't know. But I'm going to investigate. It's a shame that the actions of the NEU make people outside of the profession think that we are all behind this type of thing. No one I know in teaching believes in all this rubbish that the union is spouting. I think most teachers join a union for protection against malicious complaints and allegations, not for political reasons. I bet most of them don't even pay any attention to all of and are unaware of the union's total capture by TRAs.

Same here. No one I know in teaching believes this nonsense or is anti-safeguarding.

Then again, we are also all NASUWT at my school (or the school leaders' union), hence no strikes at all last year.

WhereAreWeNow · 07/04/2024 07:26

ResisterRex · 06/04/2024 17:36

It is possible for TU members to take their union to ET, yes. So if there were a group of members who felt they had a discrimination case (eg a GC group, for the purposes of this discussion), legal action is a hypothetical possibility.

No, I don’t think so. You can only take your employer to ET. Unions don't employ their members.

ResisterRex · 07/04/2024 07:34

@WhereAreWeNow, I think members can take their TU to ET:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/57

OP posts:
WarriorN · 07/04/2024 07:37

There's an art teacher union. I don't know if there's any other subject specific ones.

I'm in the neu but watching closely how they react to Cass.

I'd been reassured that the current leader is onside but severely doubting it now. Though has also been told it's extremely bad in there if you're GC. Unless they think the gov will come down so firmly in the light of Cass that that will end things?

I know of one teacher who's left over this.

WarriorN · 07/04/2024 07:37

Many switched to neu for the last strikes at our place

Swipe left for the next trending thread