How can we convince the Scottish Government (SG) that their beliefs are naive, misinformed, and certain to affect a generation of children?
It is well known that many parents are deeply concerned by the introduction of sexualised materials into the school curriculum, and by the unquestioning acceptance by many teachers of an un-evidenced theory that there is such a thing as a 'transgender child'. A recent complaint by such parents to Jenni Minto, Minister for Public Health and Women's Health, accused the SG of adding to their child's distress through school teaching materials, and by 'gender-affirming' attitudes in the classroom. A transcript of the reply by Stuart Downes, who is responsible for inclusive education policy in the Scottish curriculum can be read below. In it, Downes states that educational material about relationships, sexual health, and parenthood (RSHP) 'includes learning about gender identity', but, in a curious sleight of hand, also reminds us that Jenni Minto informed the Scottish Parliament that personal 'gender identity' is not taught in schools, as though there is no connection between the individual child and what is being taught. The subsequent rationale Downes makes for the SG guidance in support of 'transgender children' is not only confusing, it also demonstrates muddled thinking and some shocking, and very unsettling, views.
Of prime concern is the conflation, in the letter, of the rights and psychological sensibilities of pre-pubertal children, with those of adults. There is also an obfuscation with the interchangeability of the terms 'children' and 'young people' and an insistence on 'children's rights of privacy', including the rights of 'transgender children and girls'. (sic) Downes asserts that the educational materials enable children and young people 'to make informed decisions about their lives', as well as enabling 'choices that promote and protect their own and others' sexual health and wellbeing.'
What could all this possibly mean? Are they saying that children are being helped in school to make life decisions which can over-ride the legal status and wishes of their parents? Are children being encouraged to keep secrets from their parents whilst confiding in third parties? And are children being helped by adults to make choices designed to 'promote and protect the sexual health and wellbeing of others'? Are they suggesting that children and young people require to look after the sexual health and wellbeing of adults as well as other children? And are we not entitled to know how the SG defines 'sexual health' especially in relation to children? Does the Scottish Government really consider these diktats to be wholesome, or advisable for a child's mental health and moral development, not to mention the effect on peers, siblings, and other children who must witness the encouragement of deceit?
Even the most rudimentary examination of this Government strategy raises questions about the absurdity of equating the capacities of children with those of adults, especially in the areas of irreversible, life-changing decision-making, and in being misled into secrecy under the guise of 'privacy', by adults. But just as importantly, it is deeply irresponsible to imagine that a child's experience of their sexed body is in any way equivalent to adult sexual experience post-puberty, and smacks of being, at worse, an attack on childhood itself, and at best, a flattening, or denial of the human life cycle. Furthermore, to imply that an anxious and confused child's expression of a truly naive desire to 'change sex' is parallel to the fantasy life of certain adults, (most of whom have gone through a natural puberty), is a serious, dangerous, and fundamental error.
(Written by a retired NHS Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist, and ScotPAG member)
Stuart Downes mentions that young people should experience learning that is factual. Transgender ideology is an ideology not fact, and it is being taught as fact in schools. The fact is that sex is immutable.