Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Secondary School complaint about mixed sex changing rooms. Update, school response and request for help writing the escalated complaint to governors

364 replies

TangenitalContrivance · 05/04/2025 16:56

Hello everyone. Some may remember I asked for help with a complaint to my daughter’s secondary school in Brighton which allows Males into female changing spaces. Including swimming, without informing either children or parents.

this is clearly a safeguarding issue, borderline illegal and must not be allowed to stand.

I’m going to have to take the whole thing through a governors complaint and even higher, which I am willing to do.

please, if you can, could you read my complaint and the schools subsequent response and give me pointers for what to say in my follow up.

feel free to use the original complaint at your own school. You will be surprised how many are doing this!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
moto748e · 16/04/2025 13:42

Thanks for the confirmation; thought I was going daft there! The start, perhaps, of a lot of reverse-ferretting. When I opened MN this morning and saw the news, and the government's response, my first thought was the "We've always been at war with Eastasia" line, but I soon saw several MNetters had got there before me! 😁

TangenitalContrivance · 16/04/2025 14:12

Keeptoiletssafe · 16/04/2025 12:40

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_judgment_aea6c48cee.pdf

@TangenitalContrivance If you click this link and then press the search icon (sorry if I am teaching you to suck eggs) with ‘changing room ’ as the word, it brings up 3 results. Points 211,215,265.

really helpful thank you

OP posts:
SinnerBoy · 17/04/2025 01:29

I'd imagine that the Graun has responded to a tsunami of complaints about their mean spirited, misleading headline.

WarriorN · 17/04/2025 07:56

Intrigued to know what the rainbow alphabet lot at the NEU conference this week will come out with….!

SinnerBoy · 17/04/2025 12:46

I read several articles in the Graun today, on this subject. My and haven't they gone out of their way to report the actual words of it, whilst detailing why they think it's wrong. Apparently, hardly any transw have had their voices heard...

M. Bergdorf, E. Gomersall, V. McCloud; all had their say. Serious repercussions for transw and Donald Trump were woven into their fairy tale of why the SC is horrid and wrong.

Sam Fowles KC (man) managed to say "c*s" as much as possible, whilst claimthat the SC has muddied the previously Ccrystal clear, simple waters of the GRA 2004 and EA 2010. It's as if he simply identifies as a KC!

He's also cottoned on to whiny trope of the day:

"Boo hoo! No trans voices, not even Retired Judge, V. McCloud, were allowed to be heard!"

As if he didn't know that each side picked their witnesses.

PoppySeedBagelRedux · 17/04/2025 14:08

Sinner: Fowles isn’t a KC and he’s also not a specialist in equality law. Which is presumably why Akua Reindorf was able to pick so many holes in his witterings:

https://x.com/akuareindorf/status/1912800444419617142?s=61

TangenitalContrivance · 19/04/2025 07:22

request for any reframing I should be doing of my follow up letter now the Supreme Court has made judgement?

i wanted Easter and the fallout from the decision to get sorted out but I need to respond to the school next week.

would like them to summarily find in my favour (they won’t) but might try anyway.

all actionable advice welcome 🙏

OP posts:
PoppySeedBagelRedux · 19/04/2025 08:56

I’d just refer to previous correspondence and the SC judgement, maybe quoting what his Lordship said at the beginning that in the Equality Act sex is what matters.

And then say in light of the SC decision you trust they will be changing the policy immediately and if not, will they be taking appropriate legal advice on the matter, and also notifying their insurers?

MrsOvertonsWindow · 19/04/2025 09:29

PoppySeedBagelRedux · 19/04/2025 08:56

I’d just refer to previous correspondence and the SC judgement, maybe quoting what his Lordship said at the beginning that in the Equality Act sex is what matters.

And then say in light of the SC decision you trust they will be changing the policy immediately and if not, will they be taking appropriate legal advice on the matter, and also notifying their insurers?

This.
Presumably you're still in the midst of the school complaint procedure so the next step will be governors?
The SC judgement will I'm sure focus minds on the legal fall out from denying girls access to single sex spaces. My guess is that the government will have to stop wibbling and ensure that schools get advice to comply with the law pdq. Phillipson's policy of ignoring all this (no doubt influenced by all her gifts from Stonewall's Lord Ali) won't wash any longer.

Keeptoiletssafe · 19/04/2025 09:56

I would directly quote the 3 Supreme Court sentences about changing rooms. Then I would highlight the person/people who is/are responsible when you take it further (which you will) and they have to justify why they are going against the supreme court. From my previous DfE post on this thread, the DfE make it very clear who is ultimately responsible for safeguarding depending on which type of school it is (it’s never the DfE!).
The DfE have a very easy online complaint form which handily has an option for safeguarding so that indicates they must prioritise those complaints. If you can get in the phrase ‘prudent parent’ that would be useful.

I expect you have done all the above already.

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 19/04/2025 10:03

If I recall, the reply from your school quoted policy that said something along the lines of lesbian, gay and bisexual students should not pose any risk. Whatever else you write, I think it would be worthwhile making clear that (a) lesbian, gay and bisexual students are traditionally housed in their correct-same-sex accommodation so do not have anything to do with your complaint (and to suggest they do is offensive), and (b) they didn’t include any assessment of risk from transgender students (who are different from LGB students by dint of wanting to be housed in opposite-sex accommodation) in their reply to you.

Keeptoiletssafe · 21/04/2025 10:26

@2fallsfromSSA
😭❤️❤️❤️❤️

Thank you. I got to the bit about toilet door gaps and burst out crying! I have made myself a cup of tea. Calmed down, and carried on reading.

This will have the potential to save lives and prevent assaults. That’s not an exaggeration. It will also mean that parents of children with invisible disabilities or mental health issues will feel less worried about sending their children to school because the toilet design is (literally) less of a barrier to keeping them safe in education.

Thank you so much.

2fallsfromSSA · 21/04/2025 11:09

@Keeptoiletssafei thought you might appreciate that bit!

2fallsfromSSA · 21/04/2025 11:10

Really appreciate you posting, we hope this statement will support parents and schools enforce safeguarding for all children.

TangenitalContrivance · 21/04/2025 11:32

2fallsfromSSA · 21/04/2025 08:40

@TangenitalContrivance our statement should help you with your response. It just reiterates that schools should have always been prioritising SG and the SC judgement clarifies this:

https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2025/04/19/supreme-court-child-safeguarding/

Very useful. I am drafting the response letter now. Will share here!

OP posts:
MrsOvertonsWindow · 21/04/2025 11:41

2fallsfromSSA · 21/04/2025 08:40

@TangenitalContrivance our statement should help you with your response. It just reiterates that schools should have always been prioritising SG and the SC judgement clarifies this:

https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2025/04/19/supreme-court-child-safeguarding/

This is a wonderful letter, clearly highlighting the catastrophic failure of politicians, the DfE & the rest of the education establishment to safeguard children from the toxic belief that they could be born in the wrong body.

Hopefully parents can use some or all of it to challenge any school dancing to the tune of transactivism instead of centring children's safety and well being. I'm sending it to my MP today.

Thank you SSA. Flowers

TangenitalContrivance · 21/04/2025 12:18

This is really long.

Have I missed anything?

What have I got wrong or misrepresented?

Subject: Escalation to Stage 2: Formal Complaint Regarding Safeguarding and Mixed-Sex Changing Facilities

Dear xxxx,
I write to formally escalate my safeguarding complaint to Stage 2 under your school complaints procedure. Your Stage 1 response dated 4th April 2025 has failed to address the central safeguarding, legal, and equality concerns I raised. These matters require urgent review at the highest level, as they relate to the welfare, dignity, and legal protection of all children in your care.
Below, I set out the major shortcomings in your Stage 1 response and provide additional legal, practical, and ethical objections. Please ensure each is addressed in full by the Stage 2 review panel.

1 Failure to Guarantee Single-Sex Changing Spaces

You continue to rely on a "case-by-case" approach without ever stating that female and male children will not be required to undress in front of one another. This leaves all pupils—especially females—without a clear, enforceable right to privacy. In your own words, you state: "We wish to avoid putting students who identify as transgender in humiliating or uncomfortable positions." Yet you make no equivalent commitment to female students. Should it not be equally unacceptable to place a female pupil in the humiliating position of having to undress in front of a male peer?

2 Selective and Misleading Use of Statutory Guidance

You cite paragraph 205 of Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) concerning LGB children, which is irrelevant to this complaint. My concern is not about sexual orientation. It is about biological sex.
Your failure to engage with the safeguarding risks of placing male pupils—regardless of identity—into female spaces misrepresents my concerns and avoids addressing legitimate safeguarding expectations under:

  • The Equality Act 2010
  • KCSIE 2024
  • The School Premises (England) Regulations 2012
  • The Human Rights Act 1998

3 Supreme Court Judgment: Definition of Sex

Your policy directly conflicts with the UK Supreme Court's recent ruling (Case UKSC 2024/0042) which confirmed that "man," "woman," "male," and "female" in the Equality Act refer exclusively to biological sex. The Court stated:
"A gender recognition certificate does not erase biological sex."
"The term 'woman' in the Equality Act 2010 refers to a female of any age." "Where the law requires single-sex provision, it means based on biological sex, not gender identity."
Your policy must reflect this legal position. If it does not, I ask whether the school has taken legal advice since this ruling, and if so, whether the advice was shared with your insurers, given the potential for future safeguarding liability.

4 Compelled Speech by Policy or Peer Pressure

You appear to misunderstand the legal concept of compelled speech. When girls are expected to silently accept a male in their changing room—even if presented as an optional arrangement—this creates coercive social pressure. The potential for peer or staff disapproval is itself a form of compulsion.

5 Failure to Apply the "Prudent Parent" Standard

As the designated safeguarding lead, your legal duty is to act as a prudent parent. No prudent parent would place their daughter into a changing room full of male pupils—even those identifying differently. That this would be unthinkable in reverse (placing a lone girl in a male changing room) highlights the gender bias in your current policy.

6 Failure to Address Consent Safeguarding Boundaries

Your response ignores my explicit point: no parent, child, or authority can give permission for a child to see or be seen naked by the opposite sex. Safeguarding principles are not subject to personal preference. The law does not permit children to waive privacy protections.

7Failure to Provide an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

You did not provide the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) that should justify your "case-by-case" approach. I now formally request a copy of this document, redacted as needed.

8 Misapplication of the Gender Reassignment Characteristic

You appear to interpret the Equality Act as granting pupils who identify as trans a right to use opposite-sex facilities. It does not. The Act contains explicit exceptions allowing single-sex spaces. The comparator for someone with the characteristic of gender reassignment is someone of the same sex without the characteristic, not someone of the opposite sex.

9 Practical Safeguarding Oversight

You state that "any pupil who wishes increased privacy will be accommodated." But:

  • How are pupils expected to ask for this without disclosing personal trauma, sexual assault, religious conviction or disability?
  • How are staff trained to identify silent safeguarding needs where disclosure is unlikely (see Ofsted’s 2021 review)?
  • Where is your written framework to assess risks before placing any pupil in an opposite-sex changing space?

10 Documented Risk of Sexual Assault in Schools
Widespread underreporting of sexual abuse in schools is a matter of public record. The BBC (2016), Ofsted (2021) have both shown:

  • That girls frequently do not report incidents out of fear, shame, or peer dynamics.
  • That safeguarding must work on the presumption that abuse is occurring.

Forcing girls into mixed-sex spaces—even via soft pressure or through policy ambiguity—raises the school’s exposure to criminal, civil, and professional liability, particularly for:

  • Indecent exposure
  • Voyeurism
  • Sexual harassment under the Equality Act

11 Indirect Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief
You state that the needs of faith-based students will be considered, but provide no evidence of:

  • How religious requirements for same-sex privacy are recorded, updated, and verified.
  • What alternative options are made available to preserve these beliefs.
  • Whether any impact assessments have been conducted to understand how "case-by-case" deters some faith communities from attending School XXX altogether.

12 Request for Documentation
In accordance with FOIA and best transparency practice, I now formally request:

  • Your full legal advice (or a summary thereof) on mixed-sex changing policies.
  • The school’s Equality Impact Assessment.
  • The policy documents and training materials provided to staff about changing room access.
  • The name(s) of the individual(s) responsible for authorising this policy and managing safeguarding risks.

Final Observations

Your current approach leaves girls unprotected, parents in the dark, and the school exposed to future challenge. As per the Equality and Human Rights Commission:

"A suitable alternative might be to allow the pupil to use private changing facilities, such as the staff changing room or another suitable space."

This solution provides dignity and privacy to all pupils without sacrificing the legal rights or safeguarding of others.

Unless a clear and permanent assurance is made that changing spaces will remain single-sex and that opposite-sex entry will never be permitted, I will:

  • Escalate this complaint to the full Governing Body.
  • Refer the matter to Brighton & Hove’s Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).
  • Refer the matter to Ofsted and the Department for Education.
  • Consider initiating legal action and contacting the press.

I look forward to your acknowledgment and confirmation of the complaints panel process within five working days.
Yours sincerely,
xxx xxxxx
Father of two pupils at xxxxxx School

OP posts:
SinnerBoy · 21/04/2025 12:26

👏👏👏

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 21/04/2025 12:30

That is an astonishing piece of work. Only one thing jumped out at me - I think you have a (longish) typo here:

As the designated safeguarding lead, your legal duty is to act as a prudent parent. No prudent parent would place their daughter into a changing room full of male pupils—even those identifying differently. That this would be unthinkable in reverse (placing a lone girl in a male changing room) highlights the gender bias in your current policy.

I think you’ve got the example of “girl in room of boys” twice, if I have read that correctly.

TangenitalContrivance · 21/04/2025 12:31

@ everyone - my intention is to redraft this letter with any further advice from here or Bayswater included - and send it in tomorrow, first day back at school

OP posts:
Peregrina · 21/04/2025 12:56

I think you’ve got the example of “girl in room of boys” twice, if I have read that correctly.

Yes, I agree - that jumped out for me too.

AlecTrevelyan006 · 21/04/2025 13:09

Excellent

my suggestion: Ask for an answer to each point - not a generic all-encompassing answer.

SparklyPinkHairband · 21/04/2025 13:14

TangenitalContrivance · 21/04/2025 12:18

This is really long.

Have I missed anything?

What have I got wrong or misrepresented?

Subject: Escalation to Stage 2: Formal Complaint Regarding Safeguarding and Mixed-Sex Changing Facilities

Dear xxxx,
I write to formally escalate my safeguarding complaint to Stage 2 under your school complaints procedure. Your Stage 1 response dated 4th April 2025 has failed to address the central safeguarding, legal, and equality concerns I raised. These matters require urgent review at the highest level, as they relate to the welfare, dignity, and legal protection of all children in your care.
Below, I set out the major shortcomings in your Stage 1 response and provide additional legal, practical, and ethical objections. Please ensure each is addressed in full by the Stage 2 review panel.

1 Failure to Guarantee Single-Sex Changing Spaces

You continue to rely on a "case-by-case" approach without ever stating that female and male children will not be required to undress in front of one another. This leaves all pupils—especially females—without a clear, enforceable right to privacy. In your own words, you state: "We wish to avoid putting students who identify as transgender in humiliating or uncomfortable positions." Yet you make no equivalent commitment to female students. Should it not be equally unacceptable to place a female pupil in the humiliating position of having to undress in front of a male peer?

2 Selective and Misleading Use of Statutory Guidance

You cite paragraph 205 of Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) concerning LGB children, which is irrelevant to this complaint. My concern is not about sexual orientation. It is about biological sex.
Your failure to engage with the safeguarding risks of placing male pupils—regardless of identity—into female spaces misrepresents my concerns and avoids addressing legitimate safeguarding expectations under:

  • The Equality Act 2010
  • KCSIE 2024
  • The School Premises (England) Regulations 2012
  • The Human Rights Act 1998

3 Supreme Court Judgment: Definition of Sex

Your policy directly conflicts with the UK Supreme Court's recent ruling (Case UKSC 2024/0042) which confirmed that "man," "woman," "male," and "female" in the Equality Act refer exclusively to biological sex. The Court stated:
"A gender recognition certificate does not erase biological sex."
"The term 'woman' in the Equality Act 2010 refers to a female of any age." "Where the law requires single-sex provision, it means based on biological sex, not gender identity."
Your policy must reflect this legal position. If it does not, I ask whether the school has taken legal advice since this ruling, and if so, whether the advice was shared with your insurers, given the potential for future safeguarding liability.

4 Compelled Speech by Policy or Peer Pressure

You appear to misunderstand the legal concept of compelled speech. When girls are expected to silently accept a male in their changing room—even if presented as an optional arrangement—this creates coercive social pressure. The potential for peer or staff disapproval is itself a form of compulsion.

5 Failure to Apply the "Prudent Parent" Standard

As the designated safeguarding lead, your legal duty is to act as a prudent parent. No prudent parent would place their daughter into a changing room full of male pupils—even those identifying differently. That this would be unthinkable in reverse (placing a lone girl in a male changing room) highlights the gender bias in your current policy.

6 Failure to Address Consent Safeguarding Boundaries

Your response ignores my explicit point: no parent, child, or authority can give permission for a child to see or be seen naked by the opposite sex. Safeguarding principles are not subject to personal preference. The law does not permit children to waive privacy protections.

7Failure to Provide an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

You did not provide the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) that should justify your "case-by-case" approach. I now formally request a copy of this document, redacted as needed.

8 Misapplication of the Gender Reassignment Characteristic

You appear to interpret the Equality Act as granting pupils who identify as trans a right to use opposite-sex facilities. It does not. The Act contains explicit exceptions allowing single-sex spaces. The comparator for someone with the characteristic of gender reassignment is someone of the same sex without the characteristic, not someone of the opposite sex.

9 Practical Safeguarding Oversight

You state that "any pupil who wishes increased privacy will be accommodated." But:

  • How are pupils expected to ask for this without disclosing personal trauma, sexual assault, religious conviction or disability?
  • How are staff trained to identify silent safeguarding needs where disclosure is unlikely (see Ofsted’s 2021 review)?
  • Where is your written framework to assess risks before placing any pupil in an opposite-sex changing space?

10 Documented Risk of Sexual Assault in Schools
Widespread underreporting of sexual abuse in schools is a matter of public record. The BBC (2016), Ofsted (2021) have both shown:

  • That girls frequently do not report incidents out of fear, shame, or peer dynamics.
  • That safeguarding must work on the presumption that abuse is occurring.

Forcing girls into mixed-sex spaces—even via soft pressure or through policy ambiguity—raises the school’s exposure to criminal, civil, and professional liability, particularly for:

  • Indecent exposure
  • Voyeurism
  • Sexual harassment under the Equality Act

11 Indirect Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief
You state that the needs of faith-based students will be considered, but provide no evidence of:

  • How religious requirements for same-sex privacy are recorded, updated, and verified.
  • What alternative options are made available to preserve these beliefs.
  • Whether any impact assessments have been conducted to understand how "case-by-case" deters some faith communities from attending School XXX altogether.

12 Request for Documentation
In accordance with FOIA and best transparency practice, I now formally request:

  • Your full legal advice (or a summary thereof) on mixed-sex changing policies.
  • The school’s Equality Impact Assessment.
  • The policy documents and training materials provided to staff about changing room access.
  • The name(s) of the individual(s) responsible for authorising this policy and managing safeguarding risks.

Final Observations

Your current approach leaves girls unprotected, parents in the dark, and the school exposed to future challenge. As per the Equality and Human Rights Commission:

"A suitable alternative might be to allow the pupil to use private changing facilities, such as the staff changing room or another suitable space."

This solution provides dignity and privacy to all pupils without sacrificing the legal rights or safeguarding of others.

Unless a clear and permanent assurance is made that changing spaces will remain single-sex and that opposite-sex entry will never be permitted, I will:

  • Escalate this complaint to the full Governing Body.
  • Refer the matter to Brighton & Hove’s Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).
  • Refer the matter to Ofsted and the Department for Education.
  • Consider initiating legal action and contacting the press.

I look forward to your acknowledgment and confirmation of the complaints panel process within five working days.
Yours sincerely,
xxx xxxxx
Father of two pupils at xxxxxx School

Edited

Sorry I don't feel qualified to offer any advice, and I will blatantly "borrow" from you when I write my multiple letters to multiple schools (current primary, future primary, and I may even throw in the potential secondary school even though we are a few years away) - so basically place marking!💐

Great work @TangenitalContrivance

MrsOvertonsWindow · 21/04/2025 13:17

What an excellent and comprehensive letter that really holds the school to account for their actions. 👏👏

One small suggestion - where you state :
"Forcing girls into mixed-sex spaces—even via soft pressure or through policy ambiguity—raises the school’s exposure to criminal, civil, and professional liability, particularly for:

  • Indecent exposure
  • Voyeurism
  • Sexual harassment under the Equality Act
You could add - "It also exposes boys to potential allegations of serious criminal acts if they are enabled to be in spaces where girls undress for sports like swimming" ?

Just a thought.