Identifying as a different gender

The information you are giving out is not correct. Its not about compromising my belief it is about the latest thinking in regards to children. Social transition involves names, pronouns etc, it is very clear in the cass report this can not be considered a neutral act and more evidence is needed with regards to social transition and an affirmative approach. There are a number of reports on the implications this may have for schools.

Also it should go without saying that no child should be discriminated against. The rules for who has protected characteristics are laid out in the equality act.

An example of direct discrimination would be using pronouns a child has stated they do not want. A solution would be using gender neutral pronouns for those who feel it compromises their beliefs.

Indirect discrimination could be having a dress code that means a child cannot choose between skirt and trousers. I know the rules on that at my school but not others but I'd assume children are given that choice in most schools

Abide not abuse

All staff must follow staff training, we receive it every year, LGBTQ guidelines too as they relate to safeguarding.

I don't wrote these but I follow them.

The curriculum is very guided towards children being given the opportunity to make theor own minds up on most things but if its in the curriculum like British Values, those are taught directly at an age appropriate level. Safeguarding guidelines however, are expected school wide if an issue comes up

No gender neutral pronouns are just gender neutral, they don't affirm either gender by definition

Names are names, schools allow for nicknames too, for instance, a child at our school has a nickname after an animal.. let's call them "Llama"

Calling them Llama isn't going to make them grow fir and become dramatic

We have to abuse by preferred names if they are in the child's paperwork

That's interesting, thanks Glorianny.

Smileless2012

I don't know if it's the case either Callistemon.

Glorianny posted that it was unlikely that a C of E and/or Catholic school would employ a creationist due to a conflict of beliefs, which made me wonder if that could give rise to a claim of discrimination.

A creationist is unlikely to be employed by a Cof E school, but if they were, one of the restrictions upon them would be that they did not teach or promote creationism, as it would conflict with the school ethos.
A template for terms of employment in C ofE schools includes this paragraph
Employees’ attention is drawn to Section 60(5) of the Act which allows us to have regard to any conduct by a teacher which is incompatible with the precepts of, or with the upholding of the tenets of, the Anglican religion, in relation to termination of employment.
So they. might be sacked.

I don't know if it's the case either Callistemon.

Glorianny posted that it was unlikely that a C of E and/or Catholic school would employ a creationist due to a conflict of beliefs, which made me wonder if that could give rise to a claim of discrimination.

Smileless2012

Saying that sex is biological and immutable and that people cannot change their sex isn't a belief, it's a fact.

I wonder how a school would stand legally Glorianny, if they asked a potential teaching member of staff if they were GC or creationist and if they said they were, didn't get the job. Could that be a case of discrimination?

I didn't know that was the case.

I've known people without any belief who have taught in faith schools; I don't, however, know any creationists at all.

I know the Equality acts refers to it as a belief VS but that doesn't alter the fact, that it's a biological fact.

I don't think that's correct VS. Gender neutral pronouns are social affirmation in the same way that gender pronouns are.

By using gender neutral pronouns you are affirming that the person/people you are addressing do not identify as a particular gender. In the same way that using gender pronouns affirms to the person/people you are addressing that they identify as male or female.

No, it's a belief Smileless as laid out by the Equality Act

Saying that sex is biological and immutable and that people cannot change their sex isn't a belief, it's a fact.

I wonder how a school would stand legally Glorianny, if they asked a potential teaching member of staff if they were GC or creationist and if they said they were, didn't get the job. Could that be a case of discrimination?

galaxy

Gender neutral pronouns and names are not social affirmation anyway

So no need to worry

I think its important to follow the current thinking around social affirmation. As I have said repeatedly I hope that staff will receive guidelines that reflect this.

I think it's important to have the right balance with children, in terms of respecting them as people and as an authority.

However GC is a belief, a protected one yes but still a belief. Adult beliefs do not trump children's rights or needs. Especially when you can easily use gender neutral pronouns or names and be respectful while keeping your beliefs.

No one in schools should be trying to push their beliefs on children, they should be following the schools guidelines and ethos and the curriculum

I don't think it is question of if an 11 year old girl's request to be addressed in a certain way trumps a teacher's right to be gender critical. The 11year old was following the ethos of the school in requesting to be addressed as "they". Their class mates supported them. The teacher was not following the ethos of the school.
It's a situation which can arise over other ideas such as religion. If for instance a teacher issued a child in a Jewish school with detention ,which would keep the child in school after sunset on a Friday, and the child was expected home for Shabbat, would the child leaving, be them overruling the teacher?
A C of E school or an RC school would be unlikely to employ a teacher who was a creationist because of conflicts of belief.
Teachers do have to conform to the ethos of the school.

Ah yes, I see what you mean Doodledog.

Elegran

I've just looked again, and the 23.04 I saw previously was the date, not the time, so my bedtime is earlier than I meant it to be. It has been a busy day. G'night

😂😂

Completely agree with Caleo . One small adjustment would make the greeting appropriate to all genders .

😂

I've just looked again, and the 23.04 I saw previously was the date, not the time, so my bedtime is earlier than I meant it to be. It has been a busy day. G'night

Smileless2012

Can't a particular case only set a precedent if it goes to court?

Yes, that's why I said a precedent of sorts, even not a legal one.😀

It's probably not the right term, but I meant that the more these things are resolved one way or the other the more subsequent ones are likely to do the same, even without legal input.

The teacher's subjects were apparently philosophy and religious education (greenlady102 Sat 22-Apr-23 12:42:13)

That may be relevant both to her resistance to modifying her stance on transexuals and to the possible perception of her by the class as an easy target for -pressurising-- winding up. Children are not kind to earnest and maybe inexperienced temporary teachers. Religious education is that kind of subject.

Now I really am going to call it a day and go to bed.

Can't a particular case only set a precedent if it goes to court?

I'd be surprised if the details are ever made public. The school has a reputation to protect, and won't want speculation in the public domain, and the incident is likely to be damaging to the teacher, too.

The pertinent issue, however, is whether the rights of an eleven year old child to insist that a teacher doesn't refer to her/them as a girl should trump the rights of a teacher to hold gender critical views. For those reasons, the case is important in establishing some sort of precedent, even if not a legal one, as it won't go to court.

The rest (the school ethos and the employee relations between the school and its staff) is a matter for them to decide and for the parents to take into account when paying the fees.