The horror of the UK’s Gender guidance for schools -

The draft gender guidance for schools released in the UK shortly before Christmas is a dangerous action of conservative politics that will increase mental health issues in LGBTQIA kids. As an experienced teacher that has worked closely with at risk students and has seen situations begin to spiral out of control the effect of enacting such a strategy is not in doubt. It strikes at the ability for those in the wellbeing team at schools to build trust with students which is the key for any disclosures around a host of issues from gender questioning, sexuality, bullying and even anxiety. The sad truth is that once students close themselves off from wellbeing support at school along with a tricky situation at home, we begin to see an increase in negative behaviours like self-harm and suicide. Anyone therefore that attempts to limit or influence the ability of people working in this space to build trust is therefore not acting in the best interest of individual children but are pushing political views based on their own beliefs.

The Guidance

In a nutshell the guidance suggests that in cases where students wish to have any level of social transition the school should inform ‘parents as a matter of priority”. Beyond this, in an instance when a change of pronouns has been agreed (after parental consent) then “no teacher or pupil should be compelled to use these pronouns”. This amounts to allowing students and staff to deliberately misgender these students which quickly becomes a form of bullying and harassment.

Throughout the Guidance the recuring theme is to prompt the gender critical views and emphasis on biological sex. The document even highlights that situations should be handled carefully without implying “contested views around gender identity are fact”. This is even though the overwhelming scientific evidence and advice is definitive in relation to trans identities and there continues to be little argument within the medical profession. (Here are a few lists of American, Australian and UK bodies that all support gender affirming care for instance, and we also have the noticeably clear position of the UN). It is in fact primarily people without any expertise in medical fields whose position is based on opinion that really question these views and have led to the gender critical movement. Unfortunately, because of legitimising this gender critical view the Guidance therefore requires students to use toilets related to their biological sex and sport should have “clear rules which mandate separate-sex participation”.

On thing that is worth noting is the Guidance is not legally binding with reports that a complete ban on social transitioning in schools was considered but found to be unlawful and therefore discarded. Even in the current state the Guidance is still hugely problematic from a legal perspective as evidence suggests that it could easily result in legal action against schools and the government. The simple fact that such Guidance seems to conflict with existing discrimination laws should be a clear red flag for anyone supporting such a plan but those that seem to hold gender critical views seem to perceive things differently.

The Effect

The guidance if followed by schools will undoubtable have a negative impact on students through two different sets of experience. Firstly, for those Trans kids with supportive parents who can explore social transition there are increasing roadblocks due to the guidance that will not only limit their potential to experience meaningful affirmation in their gender but also lead to an increase in discrimination. Afterall despite having the support of their families these students would become the victim of misgendering and deadnaming as a matter of accepted behaviour since the school can ‘not compel’ common respect. Additionally, the attempt to ban trans students from using the relevant sex space will also create an elevated level of anxiety and further lead to potential harm. In 2017 according to Stonewall’s School Report 64% of trans students experienced bullying, clearly looking at the logical outcome of following this guidance with the loss of positive messaging due to the so called ‘contested views’ and these limitations will only increase. Additionally in the past the positive affirmation of social transition may have elevated some of the negative mental health outcomes from bullying how with these clear limitations that balance shifts in an extremely negative way. Therefore, even in a situation where parents are supportive following the guidance will clearly have a negative impact on trans students’ mental health.

Of course, the other possibility exists where students don’t have supportive parents. This is unfortunately all too common as in 2022 surveys showed more than 40% of Trans identifying young people experience abuse from relatives, mostly parents (read some pretty horrifying examples here). This does not even account for those households that just lack the understanding and ability to support their kids. This is why one third of LGBTQ identifying people don’t come out until adulthood. In this context there are two logical outcomes of the guidance, firstly students that seek support at school and wish to experience even the most rudimentary form of social transition are outed to their parents which could lead to a negative outcome, even where there is not a history of violence or concern which might have raised the necessary flag for schools. Alternative and more likely is that these students that avoid coming out to their parents no longer access wellbeing support at school due to a perceived lack of trust and therefore suffer in silence.

The mental health outcomes of Trans youth in Britian are terrifying, with data in 2017 showing 80% of trans students have self-harmed and 40% having attempted suicide. In 2021 survey found that 77% of trans youth experienced suicidal thoughts which suggest things haven improved too much. Considering this existing trend of alarming mental health and suicide the logical outcomes of the guidance on students will only cause greater harm.

The Response

Of course, conservative groups and Anti-trans campaigns have been quick to celebrate the Guidance. Unsurprisingly, some of these bodies seem to think it does not go far enough. A view clearly based on their prejudice against trans identities and preconceived values. These groups and individuals have been vocal in support of a broader attack on human rights, and their views represent a slide into fascist extremism.

However, those in the industry, thankfully, have voiced concerns. A survey of 7000 teachers found 41% of secondary teachers felt the guidance would be divisive while another 10% preferred their own current policies. In fact, only 15% were open to whatever was recommended. That means the majority of those people who are responsible for potentially implementing this guidance have significant issues with the draft as it stands. This fact has prompted both the NEU and the NASUWT to speak out against the Guidance. Both have advocated for schools to ignore the recommendations and have highlighted that the guidance is not legally binding.

This response from amongst my colleagues back in the UK is personally heartening as it shows that the commitment to support the well-being of young people is strong. It also should be a wake-up call to those sitting on the fence since people who work with students and are in the school environment can see the likelihood of a negative effect on young people. These people are at the coalface and can see firsthand the impact of supportive action and the presence of widespread discrimination in schools. I trust my fellow teachers’ judgement more than a government that has enough trouble keeping schools from collapsing and remaining open.

The washup

Currently, the Guidance is in draft stage and under consultation. However, with the clear anti-trans messaging from the government, including comments from the PM Rishi Sunak, it is unlikely that they are going to seriously listen to any LGBTQIA advocates. It will fall to those in the profession to continue to recognise the damage of following this divisive Guidance and choose to the path recommended by the unions, to just ignore it.