Secondary School Parent, West Midlands

By /
My daughter  announced that she had gender dysphoria and was transgender in Spring  2020 , she was only 13. She child had no prior history of gender dysphoria. However, she is diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome in 2021.I discovered that without my knowledge or explicit consent, her school had started the process of socially transitioning my daughter, and despite me raising concerns, they have continued to do so. Social transition is a powerful psychotherapeutic process with far-reaching consequences. It increases the likelihood of medicalisation, and experts suggest that it should not be carried out without clinical supervision.

By withholding this information from me as a parent, the school has compromised compliance with the Children’s Act 1989 Section 1 (2A) “Presume unless the contrary is shown, that the involvement of the parent in the life of the child concerned will further the child’s welfare.” I have legal responsibility for my child. Putting me aside, not respecting my choice and removing my responsibility goes against the fundamental principles of standard UK legal practice for every agency working with children. Safeguarding legislation is predicated on working in partnership with parents.

Encouraging my child to transition and normalising medical transition promotes the use of untested drugs, which will have devastating lifelong consequences, i.e. infertility, loss of sexual function and irreversible bodily harm.

I have requested to view the school’s RSE lesson plans on numerous occasions. The response that I received from the Head Of Wellbeing and Well Being teacher is that their curriculum is not influential and follows the department of education guidelines. Given the school’s stance on the social transition, I can only assume that they are not following DFE guidance on teaching materials. The school use leaflets to signpost gender questioning children to lobby groups such as Mermaids. In addition, the school has a considerably high number of trans-identifying students. Given that gender dysphoria was once a rare condition, this is incredibly concerning and proves the likelihood of the school using materials from lobby groups that promote gender ideology.

In the recently updated government guidance on teaching RSE and PSHE curriculum, it states that materials that suggest nonconformity to gender stereotypes should be seen as synonymous with having a different gender identity should not be used, and you should not work with external agencies or organisations who produce such material. The PSHE Association Supplementary guidance also states that high-quality sex and relationships education must be medically and factually correct.

There is no scientific or legal basis for teaching children the idea that all human beings are born with an innate sense of being male or female and that this feeling overrides their biological sex in determining whether they are boys or girls. The concept of innate gender identity is unprovable. It is an unverifiable feeling that has no definition in either the Equality Act 2010 (EA2010) or the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA2004). Gender identity is not a protected characteristic. If taught in schools, it must be presented accurately as a belief that some people hold – and have a right to hold – along with other, different views about gender that disagree with the idea of innate gender identity. To teach gender identity as fact without teaching other beliefs about gender would breach the Education Act 1996, which prevents the political indoctrination of children.

I also escalated my concerns with the school governors and OFSTED. The school  socially transitioned my daughter against professional advise.

 I have written to my daughter’s school about my beautiful daughter’s new sudden transgender identity. It has now been seventeen months since I have seen my child,  my whole world has been absolutely destroyed, and  I hold the school partly responsible. My daughter’s father had now put our child on a medical pathway that will destroy her body and health. And the school have facilitated and supported this.

Without medical expertise, their staff decided to allow my autistic daughter to socially transition without my knowledge, effectively excluding her from regular safeguarding practices and putting my child in extreme danger of further online indoctrination, grooming and sexual exploitation.   Instead of exploring the reasons behind this sudden announcement, they made me feel like an uncaring bigot, simultaneously alienating my child from me, the person who loves and cares about her the most.
Despite the previous endless support for my child’s education, good attendance, behaviour, and ensuring homework was always done on time, to a good standard, the school has not once attempted to reverse the complete parental alienation and estrangement that has been caused.
Education providers have a legal duty of care to take reasonable steps to reduce the risk of reasonably foreseeable harm, including personal injury (physical or psychological).