Okay, so in terms of introducing this in an age-appropriate way, to address one of the points you have made.
I think one of the biggest challenges here is that policy ambitions are often not matched by the training and confidence practitioners receive. It’s relatively easy for governments or organisations to say that schools should promote inclusion and understanding, but much harder to ensure staff feel equipped to navigate complex and sometimes controversial topics in an age-appropriate way.
For younger children, I don’t think this necessarily needs to involve detailed discussions about gender identity or lots of specialist terminology. In my own experience, these conversations often arise naturally through children’s curiosity about the people around them.
For example, I once taught a child whose mum had a female partner. Other children had questions and the child was becoming upset by some of the attention. With parental support, we planned a lesson about diversity, families and the fact that people live in different ways. The focus wasn’t on persuading children to think a certain way, but on helping them understand that differences exist and that everyone deserves respect. I don’t personally have experience of planning curriculum around trans people in general and the age group that I focused on was especially young - so early in their school journey.
I can imagine a similar approach being appropriate when younger children encounter trans people. At that age, it may be as simple as explaining that some people live differently, some people use different names or pronouns, and that we should treat people kindly.
For older children, more detailed discussion becomes possible, but I think this is where practitioner confidence and expertise become particularly important. These are complex issues that attract strong views in wider society. If schools are going to address them, staff need high-quality training and support so that education remains age-appropriate, balanced and responsive to children’s questions rather than becoming either avoidance or advocacy.
Perhaps one solution would be to have specially trained practitioners who can support schools and deliver lessons where appropriate, rather than expecting every teacher to feel equally confident teaching such a sensitive and evolving area. I don’t have all of the answers for this, but for me, perhaps involving skilled people from all sides of the debate to create a balanced curriculum would be optimal. That way all sides of the debate are covered and taught. No one single ‘agenda’ is pushed. This takes time and resources. So perhaps the whole thing should be placed on pause until the appropriate training can take place.
This doesn’t mean I don’t think age appropriate education is possible, I think it is. But I acknowledge that perhaps we aren’t there yet and that forcing practitioners to deliver contentious information without appropriate training isn’t appropriate and more needs to be done to ensure that no children are harmed during these experiences. There is quite often a gap between policy and practice and it is of course right for people to question policy if the infrastructure isn’t there to support its implementation. I think the issue is simpler for younger children, as the language and intent is simpler. It becomes more complex the older children become and this is an area outwith my expertise and so I would look to more experienced people from across the debate with differing perspectives to work together on this for balance.
I will address the other questions later on, I had a spare 15 minutes and now have to return to small children and I just wanted to share my thoughts and say I don’t have all of the answers, just hope that we can find a way to do it. And that, on reflection, perhaps the more complex questions shouldn’t be addressed until we are able to do so safely, in a trauma informed way, so as to mitigate risk.
I hope that makes sense - having to type furiously fast and won’t have the opportunity to edit as I’m needed!