EHRC consultation - schools technical guidance

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/technical-guidance-schools-consultation

'This technical guidance explains schools’ legal obligations not to discriminate against, harass or victimise pupils, as set out in chapter 1 of Part 6 of the Equality Act 2010 (the Act).

The guidance is different in England, Scotland and Wales.

We are running a consultation on this guidance. You can access the consultations for each nation from this page'

'Technical guidance for schools consultation 2026

This technical guidance explains schools’ legal obligations not to discriminate against, harass or victimise pupils, as set out in chapter 1 of Part 6 of the Equality Act 2010 (the Act).
This guidance is not a statutory code issued under section 14 of the Equality Act 2006, but it may be used as evidence in legal proceedings.
We have updated the guidance to:

• include updates and developments in the law relating to types of discrimination and protected characteristic groups
• explain how the Act applies in different education settings and institutions like academies, special schools and school-based clubs
• clarify the interaction between the Act and other related laws
• explain how the Act applies in specific circumstances, for example where restraint, isolation and seclusion is used

We have developed guidance for each nation to reflect the differences in law across England, Scotland and Wales.

We are running this consultation to gather feedback on how clearly the guidance explains schools’ obligations under the equality act and whether we have accurately reflected the law.

You can access the guidance, consultation surveys and instructions on how to take part by selecting the links on this page.'

This is a public consultation. Anyone over the age of 16 years old can take part, and all feedback will inform the guidance. You should take part in this consultation if:

• you have expertise in equality law
• you are responsible for supporting schools (education authorities, school boards)
• you are a headteacher or you work in a school
• you are an additional support for learning (ASL) teacher
• you have direct experience working in or leading schools (teachers, ASLs, school leaders, governors)
• you are a parent or carer
• you represent pupils who have protected characteristics

There's a few parts of this consultation of interest to feminists.

Sections on discrimination and protected characteristics include relevant sections to sex discrimination and 'gender reassignment', eg:

'5.69

Example:

A secondary school is considering how to provide appropriate changing facilities for a trans pupil who identifies as a girl. The school decides that the pupil must use the boys’ changing room. This is unlikely to be justified and so is likely to be unlawful indirect gender reassignment discrimination. A suitable alternative might be to allow the pupil access to a single-user, lockable changing room, which might be a staff changing room or a mixed-sex accessible bathroom.'

(this is from the 'Scotland' one)

'3.251

A male pupil attends school wearing a female pupil’s school uniform. If this is part of the process of reassigning their sex, then they will be protected from direct or indirect gender reassignment discrimination. If they are not proposing to undergo, or undergoing, the process of reassigning their sex, then they will not be protected in this way. However, they would be protected under the Act from discrimination by perception, if, for example, they are perceived to be trans and experience less favourable treatment because of it. Further, the school has a duty to have measures in place which aim to prevent bullying and the pupil is likely to be able to rely on these.'

These are reasonable examples. They can’t use spaces for the opposite sex, but forcing them into a situation that will be distressing also isn’t appropriate

It's very frustrating that all this is written by adults with zero insight into schools and / or children - just a narrow legal viewpoint about an adult desire. .
It's theoretically fine to suggest 3rd spaces but there are major safeguarding issues when you have a single child undressing in alternate spaces in a big school building at different times of the day. If it's a staff facility then adults may also need to use the space during the day - how will that work? Where will belongings be stored / kept safe? is it lockable? How will they be supervised etc etc?
It's actually a predator's dream but of course safeguarding children isn't on the EHRC's agenda.
Add to that the fact that the EHRC guidelines apply to children of all ages. 4 yrs, 8, 10, 12 etc because the law about gender reassignment applies to children of all ages - despite the nonsense of that. The notion that sex change is an adult concern that little children should be safeguarded from again, never crosses their (or anyone else's) minds who write this stuff.
It's frustrating to see no joined up thinking about children with this & that their safety and wellbeing is never addressed..

Yes, they are. There will be many throughout all the docs for all the different parts of the UK.

I just shared a couple of examples to show the kind of thing involved.

Consultation is open for comment.

All very good points.

And no, I don't suppose safeguarding is involved at all.

I wonder if the EHRC remit and the EA are actually in tension with safeguarding in some respects? Perhaps something they could consider.

The EHRC explicitly asks for comment on the legal aspects, I wonder if they are also going to take into account practical, logistical, ethical and safeguarding issues.

The whole 'dress in the uniform of the opposite sex' thing as a reasonable adjustment.... ffs.

There is in almost every school the option of girls wearing trousers, one gender neutral option, and girls identifying as boys will already be wearing it. There is no need of any kind to make a thing of a boy wearing a skirt. Plus that goes against the KCSIE guidance that schools should not be enabling social transition.

I think they've been in tension from the outset. Initially nobody even considered that anyone would be so dangerous to suggest that sex change for children was a thing to be promoted.
Once all the dubious male led trans organisations started on their campaigns of bullying and intimidation, all those who should have stood up for safeguarding children were either intimidated, too frightened of being called bigots or perhaps blissfully unaware that pubertal children were being gaslit that their uncomfortable pubertal bodies could be wrong but a sex change would fix them.

The EHRC proposals pay no attention to children's interests . They are a purely legal approach that are child and school unfriendly. I can understand why, as the pc of gender reassignment sees the demands of a middle aged man as being identical to a 6 year old boy or an 11 year old girl.
No politicians or safeguarding organisations have had the courage to highlight this anomaly. So children remain as major victims of all this with their rights being ignored and the EHRC will get this bureaucratic nonsense through as they fail to recognise that pc of age for children should give them rights to be safeguarded because of their youth.

Sorry - not meaning to derail the importance of responding to this - just so frustrated at the law and the EHRC essentially viewing all children as mini adults.

This new bit is more clear than KSCIE about pronouns.

Schools should adopt a policy whereby teachers and children who don't want to use preferred pronouns for trans pupils should be directed to avoid pronouns.

I think thats the opposite of a derail!

I wonder who would look squarely at these issues?

One footnote referred to Higgs ET re misgendering.

Tbh, I think that ship has sailed. Too many adults have failed to step in and stop queer theory activists from using children in all this for it to be changed now.

And look at the nonsense about pronouns

It's so naive to suggest that a school can have a policy about how to address each individual "trans pupil" that both "respects the rights of the trans pupil and others including staff members and those whose beliefs either align or conflict with using preferred pronouns!" Next it suggests that people could "avoid using a direct pronoun". Sigh...

Leadership teams will simply need to issue a management instruction with staff expected to comply. Children in school should not be used by adults expressing their personal disagreements about pronouns etc. In my experience only a minority of adults fail to respect that so it's likely a minor issue

Sex Matters think it is 'seriously flawed'

The guidance is required to be in line with the Equality Act 2010. We think it has serious flaws.

1. It is completely inadequate on sport, barely addressing the legal obligation of schools to ensure girls receive a fair, equal offer of sport and PE.
2. It steers schools towards treating children who identify as transgender differently from their peers. We think this is likely to amount to unlawful gender-reassignment discrimination against those children, as well as sex and belief discrimination against other children.
3. It encourages schools to allow children to make inappropriate choices,and to invite into their school and take advice from organisations that will undermine safeguarding and compliance with the Equality Act.

We have analysed the draft in detail.

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/ehrc-technical-schools-guidance-is-not-fit-for-purpose/

Thanks, RoseinaPot.

<big sigh>

It steers schools towards treating children who identify as transgender differently from their peers. We think this is likely to amount to unlawful gender-reassignment discrimination against those children, as well as sex and belief discrimination against other children.

Yes, that approach seems likely to harm everyone.

I am unconvinced by Sex Matters’ argument.

• ”It says a school should not require a child who identifies as transgender to use the correct changing room, calling this “unlikely to be justified”, and suggests a staff facility instead. This gets the law backwards: requiring a pupil to use the changing facility that is safe and suitable for their sex is not discrimination. But it is discrimination to treat the child’s use of their own sex’s facilities as inappropriate, and to move the child to an inferior, less safe space. Schools should make sure there is zero tolerance of bullying, not agree that children who identify as (or are perceived to be) LGB or T should not be in facilities for their sex.”

But these children are not being offered alternative facilities because of bullying, they are being offered alternative facilities because being in correct sex facilities causes them distress. Bearing in mind that KCSIE now requires that schools should approach social transition with extreme caution, the involvement of parents and of medical professionals, are Sex Matters saying that actually schools should overrule professional advice that the child should socially transition because the doctor is wrong?

Which would set up a precedent whereby schools can overrule any reasonable adjustment for any child with SEN recommended by a medical professional because the school doesn’t think it’s what’s best for the child.

What a pleasure to read that Sex Matters intervention. They're starting to unpick the challenges raised by seeing children as mini adults.

"A boy who identifies as transgender, non-binary or gender-questioning, or who is effeminate or gender non-conforming, is a boy who might be perceived as having the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. He may in fact be a child that grows up to realise he is gay, or he might grow up and live as a transsexual. Treating that child differently — encouraging his exclusion from boys’ sports and facilities, requiring other pupils and staff to treat him as a girl and excluding him from the ordinary rules that apply to boys (while not allowing him access to girls’ sports and facilities)— is not “inclusion”.

Sex Matters is fully aware of Cass's conclusion that so called gender medicine is built on "shaky foundations" and poor quality research so it's good to see the EHRC challenged about their flawed assumptions that these vulnerable children have been in any way accurately diagnosed. Schools should not be undermining their well developed systems and practices in a way that results in these children being less safe.

Schools however are well practised in making reasonable adjustments for children in order that they can access schooling.

It would need to be demonstrated that allowing a distressed pupil to change away from their peers in order that they can participate in PE lessons is actually an unreasonable adjustment.

They also highlight that inviting queer theory activists into schools to discuss matters of sexuality and identity with children below the age of consent is a school potentially weakening safeguaring and abdicating their responsibility to others
"Adults (and older teenagers) who wish to talk to vulnerable children about their sexual orientation and feelings about their bodies may not have the child’s best interests at heart, or may simply be out of their depth. Without careful safeguarding such groups can attract predators and radicalisation, and spread socially contagious feelings of dysphoria, anxiety and introspection. Telling children that it is “transphobic” not to allow them into opposite-sex facilities can cause school anxiety and avoidance".

There's a lot to unpick but it's great to see a proper education focus on all this rather than the adultification of children demanded by queer theory lobbyists.

How does a child know whether they are or not (ignoring completely the common sense element of absolutely not letting them enter the world of madness)

Well said.
These are completely age inappropriate and dangerous issues to lay on developing children. Sadly that's not stopped society from promoting them.

Far too much ignorance about children - all encapsulated in those guidelines.

Well, my suggestion would be 'proposing to under a process of reassigning their sex' is a complete nonsense built upon a foundation of bullshit.

It's meaningless. What does it mean? 'I'm going to cut my genitals off' or 'I'm going to grow my hair like a girl' or 'I want to be called Sam'.

for a start, it's not possible to 'reassign' sex. What does 'assigning' sex even mean? Sex isn't 'assigned'. Who would 'assign' it?

Sex is observed, often in utero.

Gender can perhaps be 'assigned', but only if we have a clear definition of 'gender', but we don't even have that.

😀Foundation of bullshit is very apt.
These is also "professionally dangerous" guidance.

It ignores the requirements that schools have to safeguard children.
It promotes dangerous safeguarding practices (the changing elsewhere in adult spaces )
It mangles the schools requirement to promote consistent age appropriate , educational policies (the pronouns nonsense, ignorance of sport / PE for children issues.
It advocates (yet again) the handing over of professional responsibilities for management / pastoral care etc) to unqualified queer theory lobbyists.
And more...