Secondary School mixed sex changing rooms complaint: Update from school (again)

[TangenitalContrivences]

Hello everyone - Have just received a further update from my daughters (14) secondary school (Brighton) regarding my complaint - which is at stage 2 - go to governors complaint, and my further email to the school asking them to comply with the EHRC interim guidance.

I'll copy both responses below, redacted.

I would very, very much appreciate specific feedback to include in my responses to the school, it's been people here (and elsewhere) who have helped me put together really powerful letters that have clearly rattled the school.

However - there is still a male in the female changing spaces at this school. Therefore it is mixed sex.

(link to the last discussion if you want context https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5309038-secondary-school-complaint-about-mixed-sex-changing-rooms-update-school-response-and-request-for-help-writing-the-escalated-complaint-to-governors )

Yes exactly!

Any chance someone can sneak into the head's office and install a spy cam, so we can all see the reaction when the emails are opened?

This is where schools use the “vexitious emails” excuse though. “We’ve given out answer, you are harassing.” And close down.

Brilliant letters. @TangenitalContrivences - well done you! I think it's excellent you mention your neurodivergence too. Not so keen on reasonable adjustments when it's anything other than 'trans' apparently. How much time and money has been wasted on breaking the law / paying for illegal activist 'advice' rather than helping SEND children in the classroom I wonder. Some FOIs would be interesting.

The pattern of using their position (teachers, the governors) for political activism is worryingly stark here.

Not sure this will fly when it's a safeguarding concern if boys are allowed into girls toilets though.

I don't think you can label 'we're breaking the law and you're pointing this out' vexatious. No doubt they'll try. Though it wouldn't fly in a court of law.

It shouldn’t fly, no. But their arrogance clearly knows no bounds.

"The EHRC’s interim update is a direct explanation of how that legal interpretation applies in practice, and schools are expected to follow it immediately."

Just to clarify, expected by whom?

It seems to me that the head, chair of governors etc will simply state that as laypersons they are awaiting formal legal advice and or guidance from the department of education. Government etc.

It's all very well saying you must comply with the ( clarified) law but who enforces it and what would a reasonable timescale be for it to be fully implemented? Many schools will wait for full guidance to be published and how likely is it that any court or regulatory body will think it unreasonable to wait for it?

"Not sure this will fly when it's a safeguarding concern if boys are allowed into girls toilets though."

Well the safeguarding lead will have done a risk assessment and unlike public toilets it's not "boys" in general but a specific boy who will have been risk assessed on their "case by case basis".

The legality of doing this is now suspect and won't stand long term but the clarification of the law does not change the safeguarding risk surely?

Case-by-case should never mean individual-person-by-individual-person. The “cases” in this case are the situation - ie, here, the toilets.

If a toilet is deemed to be single sex, then it is single sex for all people. Another toilet - a different case - may be deemed to be mixed sex.

For reference:

https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/11/06/sex-peanuts-and-statutory-interpretation/

You have had a response, therefore you have exhausted the internal process within a school, and therefore contacting Ofsted is legitimate.

I am assuming you cannot speak to the parents of the boy concerned on the basis that they support his gender identity.

This is a large school, there must be 800 boys. (And the same number of girls). The number of trans identifying will be 20-30 in the school.

"Case-by-case should never mean individual-person-by-individual-person"

Pretty sure they do in schools.

Individual risk assessments for pupils are commonplace. In some cases Certain pupils may be banned from using the communal toilets with other pupils and required to use individual disabled toilets for example if they have a history of self harm or under investigation by the police.

If a boy is saying they are trans and has been allowed to use the girls toilets to date then a risk assessment will have been completed which is what they would show Ofsted if challenged about it....

"The number of trans identifying will be 20-30 in the school."

This seems like a high estimate....

No. This is the equality act don’t forget. You can’t decide on an individual basis that one person isn’t allowed to be treated according to the law. All children are to be treated according to the law. Clearly some children will need ADDITIONAL safeguarding due to self harm risk or offending risk - but a) that does not remove that child’s lawful treatment under the EA, b) additional safeguarding does not come with the risk to other children, and c) additional safeguarding must not mean other children are treated less equally or unlawfully.

lol. At least one per class. 10 per cohort in a large secondary. 70 in the school
as a whole.

@TangenitalContrivences thinking a bit more about the insurance side of things....

It's very possible that the school has signed up to the government RPA for insurance for state schools:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/join-the-risk-protection-arrangement-rpa-for-schools

Is it worth an email to the DfE asking them if a school will still be covered under this insurance scheme if it has said that it will delay taking the action needed to follow an existing law?

"lol. At least one per class. 10 per cohort in a large secondary. 70 in the school
as a whole."

Get a grip. There's probably only 10 in the entire school, and most of them transboys. 1 per class indeed!!

Perhaps op could add this to the proposed foi request!

So why are the rights and safety of all 800 girls in the school being compromised for the sake of one or two boys who say they are girls?

Because they're girls.

Walking boy-resource units.

"So why are the rights and safety of all 800 girls in the school being compromised for the sake of one or two boys who say they are girls?"

Presumably because the school has assessed their safety is not at risk having done a risk assessment of the two trqnsgirls/ boys. ( If they are even allowed to use the girls toilets)

And as regards the rights because the school amongst many other organisations apparently , wrongly interpreted equality / discrimination law?

This is an awesome letter!

As if they've done a risk assessment.

Christ that would be really digging their grave wouldn’t it 😆

”this RA shows where we deliberately ignored the law to prioritise a boy’s needs over the safety and privacy of girls”

Don’t remember any of the trans tool kits ever suggesting a risk assessment. Quite the opposite.

Well I happen to know the school far better than you and in fact - have two kids there. So 😙