This is a sex and gender related post specific to statutory school safeguarding and the 2024 update to national guidance.
Background
In September 2024, the DfE's new statutory schools' safeguarding guidance came into effect. Importantly, it explains the difference between LGB and gender questioning (this term was used instead of "T") children. Its updated paragraphs (205-209) signpost towards both the Cass Report and the draft Gender Questioning Children guidance. It was published in May 2024, with the draft GQC guidance expected to be finalised in July... and then came the election. The GQC guidance didn't get finalised. Obviously the other document that it references (the Cass Report) is already finalised.
The detail
Paragraphs 205-209 are prefaced by the following words:
N.B. This section remains under review, pending the outcome of the gender questioning children guidance consultation, and final gender questioning guidance documents being published.
As far as I can tell from the government website, the fact that these paragraphs "remain under review" doesn't stop them being statutory. This page about statutory guidance states:
Statutory guidance sets out what schools and local authorities must do to comply with the law. You should follow the guidance unless you have a very good reason not to.
There is some guidance that you must follow without exception. In these cases we make this clear in the guidance document itself.
These publications reflect the current legal position (unless otherwise indicated), but may not reflect the current government’s policies.
It also makes it clear that "must" refers to legal requirements and "should" refers to best practice.
Reason for my post
I'm keen to hear views from teachers, people with experience working with children, people with legal knowledge and other brilliant minds on this board WRT:
- a school saying that it has consulted its lawyers and has received advice to say that it doesn't need to follow these paragraphs because they are "draft". IANAL but that doesn't sound right to me from a legal perspective. Surely these paragraphs are current but potentially subject to future change i.e. they should be followed the same way as all other current guidance in the document.
- When asked their position on the actual content within the paragraphs beyond a nebulous "we follow a watchful waiting approach"**, responding with "for a complaint that paragraphs 205-209 of KCSIE are still in draft form, you are advised to complain directly to the Department for Education." Obviously that's not the answer to the question that was asked! However, it does make me wonder if the DoE should be asked to remind schools that all published guidance is current. You'd think that'd be obvious but maybe it's not??
To my understanding, paras 205-209 in the KCSIE guidance represent current best practice and schools would need to have a good reason not to follow them. To me, "our lawyers told us we don't need to" (paraphrased) sounds as ridiculous and concerning as the act of going to the lawyers on this in and of itself. But are there any good reasons why schools might not follow this guidance?
** There are various interpretations of watchful waiting. For example, some people believe that following a one-step-at-a-time "let's change your pronouns and see how you feel" is watchful waiting.