This blog was first published as part of the Scottish Education Union Newsletter 33 Republished with permission.
The Scottish Education Union is a coalition of parents, grandparents and local communities who want to improve standards of education in Scotland and challenge indoctrination in schools. To this end, we are launching a fundraising campaign, aiming to raise £100,000 to employ three members of staff to support our work. If you would like to support SUE, please This link,sign up Substack Blog Please use SUE's bank account details to make your donation.
A little while ago, I NO2NPcampaigning against the Designated Persons scheme proposed by the Scottish Government, which still exists today (in a different form from its original). Designated Persons was an initiative developed in Scotland which would have made all professionals who came into contact with children in Scotland designated persons, or report to designated persons. Through this initiative, every aspect of a child's “well-being” (not defined in law) would be monitored and recorded by health nurses, childcare workers, nurses, doctors, teachers etc. Opponents of this initiative felt that this was a huge expansion of state powers, and in many ways an attempt by the state to usurp the roles and rights of families and parents.
Our campaign had two core aspects. The first was an attempt to generate public pressure through rallies around the country, media coverage and involvement of politicians. The second was the legal aspect, with a case against the nominee system being taken to the UK Supreme Court.
I have always been uneasy about the legal aspect because once you turn to the law there is a risk that you are handing over the power to decide what is right and what is wrong to lawyers and unelected judges. A good example of this is when the Attorney General, Scotland's chief legal adviser, said: He rejected the idea that there are legal problems with the designated person system.The case then went to the Inner House, part of Scotland's highest civil court, where it was tried again. It was determined that there were no legal issuesIn fact, the illegality of the designated persons system was not recognised until the case reached the UK Supreme Court.
It is worth keeping this process in mind when considering the application of the law, because somehow, magically, the same law has been approved without issue twice by Scotland's top lawyers, and then suddenly the Supreme Court has decided that, at least in relation to data sharing of children's personal information, Article 8 of the Human Rights Act had been violated.
Furthermore, despite ruling against the data-sharing aspect of the nominator scheme, the Supreme Court maintained that the basic idea of the nominator scheme was “undoubtedly just and harmless”. I, along with everyone involved in the NO2NP campaign and the vast majority of parents I meet across Scotland, totally disagree with this part of the judgment. But it is black and white and it is written into the law. The principle of nominator schemes is just because several judges in London have said so.
Legal writer John Holbrook It was noted at the timeBut this is in many ways the potential danger of using the law to fight public political questions about parental rights and their role in society: Judges' conservatism is always likely to defend the prevailing order of things, he argues.
Challenge
So the question arises: with regards to the insanity of policies being introduced in schools in the name of supporting “transgender” students, the sexualisation of children, the potential loss of gender-based spaces and sports, and the broader issue of school indoctrination, what role should the law play and how should we use it?
To be honest, I don't have the answer to this question, but I think there is room to use the law to challenge what goes on in schools.
I thought the first meeting of the parents and supporters group (PSG) last week was great, but the issue of the law came up again and again and there are various Legal issues have been raised The harm that is happening in schools. Indeed, as one PSG activist brilliantly pointed out, in Scotland, schools Unsafe Space! She's right.
One parent also raised the idea that parents, or groups of parents, might use the law to challenge the harm caused to children by the promotion of transgender ideas or the use of inappropriate sex education materials. In England, the issue of the harms of gender transition is being debated, Legal issues was taken into consideration.
However, the same parent noted that following her and others' concerns, the principal had decided to “take the clitoris off the curriculum.” Major In schools, incredibly, part of sex education includes teaching young children about sex and sexual pleasure. The takeaway from this, at least to me, is that this change in curriculum didn't require a bunch of lawyers or old, cheesy judges. It just took a few parents asserting their right to speak up about what they thought was wrong to change the situation.
Elsewhere, the Scottish Women's Association has, in fact, Provision of separate toilets for boys and girls in schoolsAnd Scottish education “Follow the wishes of (students') parents”Furthermore, human rights law requires education and guidance “Religious and philosophical beliefs” While listening to the opinions of parents, we believe that the school It became a center of social justice activism..
knowledge
Like I said, I think we can use the law, but I think a key part of this approach is equipping parents with knowledge about what schools should and shouldn't do, not just because it's illegal. mistakenIt goes against basic principles of education, threatens to undermine the distinction between adults and children, and confuses education and politics.
About 50 people attended the first PSG meeting. Imagine if there were 500 or even 5,000 people. Then we wouldn't have to rely on lawyers and judges to get the schools and politicians to pay attention. They would panic, if that sounds bad.
Use the law wherever you can, but more importantly, understand what the laws are, what actions violate the basic rules of education, and make sure everyone understands that whatever your principal or city council member thinks is “progressive,” we, the people, think is wrong.
Over the next two months, SUE will be explaining in detail what is happening in schools that is legally, morally and politically dangerous and harmful. We want to produce a leaflet that explains this in detail. We think we need to do this and mount a massive national campaign, because at the end of the day, as the unlawful Scottish ruling on nominators has demonstrated, and as the Supreme Court ruling that nominators are essentially lawful and harmless has shown, when it comes to doing the right thing, we cannot expect judges to fight for us – we have to rely on each other.
image: Lee County CourthouseGiddings, TX | License CC BY 2.0
